• 
MESSAGE 

FROM    THE 

PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  ' 

ACCOMPANYING    A    REPORT    TO    HIM 
FROM 

THE  SECRETARY  OF  STATE, 

AND    SUNDRY    DOCUMENTS 

RELATIVE   TO  THE  AFFAIRS  OF  THE   UNITED  STATES 

ON    THE 

MISSISIPPI; 

THE    INTERCOURSE    WITH    THE 

INDIAN     NATIONS, 

AND 

THE  INEXECUTIOJtf  OF  THE  TREATY 

BETWEEN  THE  f 

UNITED  STATES  AND  SPAIN. 


230!  January,  1798, 

Ordered  to  lie  on  the  Table. 
Publifhed  by  order  of  the  HOUSE  of  REPRESENTATIVES, 

PHILADELPHIA  : 
PRINTED    BY    W,    ROSS, 


F373 


MESSAGE. 


Gentlemen  of  the  Senate,  and 

Gentlemen  of  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives, 

A  T  the  commencement  of  this  fejjion  of  Congrefs, 
I  propofed  in  the  courfe  of  it,  to  communicate  to  both 
Houfes,  further  information  concerning  thejituation  of  our 
affairs  in  the  territories  of  the  United  States  Jituated  on 
the  MiJJifippi  river,  and  its  neighbourhood, — our  inter- 
courfe  with  the  Indian  nations, — our  relations  with  the 
Spamjh  government,  and  tht  conduct  of  their  officers  and 
agents:  This  information  will  be  found  in  a  report  of  the 
Secretary  of  State,  and  the  documents  attending  it,  which 
I  now  prefent  to  the  Senate  and  Houfe  of  Reprefentativ>es. 


JOHN  ADAMS. 


UNITED  STATES, 
Jan.  23d, 


xxxxx><xxxxxxxx>&e<>o^ 


REPORT. 


To  the  PRESIDENT  of  the  UNITED  STATES. 


IN 


obfervance  of  your  directions  I  have  revifed  the  commu- 
nications from  Mr.  Ellicott,  the  Commiffioner  of  the  United 
States  at  the  Natchez,  fmce  my  Report  of  the  3d  of  July  laft, 
which,  with  the  documents  therein  referred  to,  you,  on  the 
fame  day,  laid  before  Congrefs ;  and  now  refpectfully  fubmit 
to  you  a  ftatement  of  whatever  appears  therein  to  be  material. 
The  laft  letter  from  Mr.  Ellicott,  of  which  a  communication 
was  made  to  Congrefs,  bore  date  the  loth  of  May  laft.  His 
next,  dated  the  2yth  of  that  month,  I  received  the  24th  of  Au- 
guft.  In  this  he  mentions  that  reinforcements  were  fent  from 
New-Orleans  to  the  Poft  at  Walnut  Hills,  and  rh?t  repairs 
were  made  on  the  Fort  at  the  Natchez  :  That  h^  h.:d  received 
very  fatisfactory  accounts  from  both  the  Chickafaws  and  Chac- 
taws,  that  for  more  than  eight  months  paft,  they  had  been 
tampered  with  by  the  Spanifh  Agents  and  Traders,  to  prevent 
the  late  Treaty  between  his  Catholic  Majefty  and  the  United 
States  from  being  carried  into  effecl ; — though  Mr.  Ellicott 
thinks,  without  fuccefs.  On  the  nth  of  May,  he  wrote  to 
Governor  Gayofo  defiring  a  definitive  anfwer,  as  to  the  time 
he  would  be  ready  to  proceed  to  the  determination  of  the  boun- 
daries between  the  two  Nations,  as  fpecified  in  the  Treaty  ; — 
to  which  he  received  an  unfatisfactory  anfwer.  On  the  i6th, 
he  addrefled  to  Governor  Gayofo  a  retroipe&ive  view  of  their 
correfpondence,  and  of  that  with  Lieutenant  Pope,  exhibiting 
the  repeated  promifes  and  demonftrations  of  running  the  boun- 
dary Line  and  evacuating  the  Pofts — the  non-performance  of 
thofe  promifes — and  the  varied  pretences  for  the  delay.  To 
this  detail  of  unfulfilled  engagements  and  contradictory  mea- 
fures,  the  Governor  anfwered  Mr.  Ellicott  on  the  lyth,  "  That 
he  mould  not  trouble  him  with  juftifying  the  motives  which 
had  caukdfome  dijagreement  in  his  (the  Governor's)  communi- 
cations;" adding  however,  that  "they  were  far  from  being 
infmcere." 


6. 

In  his  next  letter  dated  the  4th  of  June,  Mr.  Ellicott  men- 
tions that  "  The  Citizens  of  the  United  States  who  are  trad- 
ing on  the  Miffifippi  are  frequently  treated  with  great  info- 
lence,  at  the  Spanilh  Pofts,  and  their  property  taken  for  the 
ufe  of  his  Catholic  Majefty,  when  wanted,  and  always  at  a 
reduced  price."  He  inftances  the  cafe  of  a  Mr.  M'Cluny, 
from  whom  a  large  quantity  of  flour  was  thus  taken  at  the 
Walnut  Hills — and  of  Francis  Baily,  who  was  compelled  to 
receive  as  Cafh,  in  payment  for  goods  fold,  a  fpeciesof  paper, 
which  was. palling  at  a  difcount  of  twelve  per  cent. 

With  this  letteVMr.  Ellicott  tranfmitted  the  copy  of  a  Pro- 
clamation by  the  Baron  de  Carondelet,  Governor  General  of 
JLouifiana,  bearing  date  at  New-Orleans  the  24th  of  May ; 
and  ordered  to  be  publimed.  In  order  to  difiipate  reports, 
•which  had  alarmed  the  inhabitants  of  the  Natchez,  the  Baron 
therein  declares  "  That  the  fufpenfion  of  the  demarcation  of 
the  limits,  and  the  evacuation  of  the  Forts,  which  will  be 
comprehended  on  the  other  fide  of  the  line,  is  at  prefent  only 
occafioned  by  the  imperious  neceffity  of  fecuring  Lower  Loui- 
fiana  from  the  Hoftilities  of  the  Englith,  who  (he  fays)  without 
regard  to  the  inviolability  of  the  Territory  of  the  United  States, 
have  fet  on  foot  an  expedition  againft  Upper  Louifiana,  which 
they  cannot,  however,  attack  without  traverfmg  the  aforefaid 
Territory."  But  he  fuggefts,  that  if  they  made  them/elves 
mailers  of  the  Illinois  Country,  they  would  then  attack  Lower 
JLouifiani.  This  fabulous  expedition  of  the  Englifh  from  Ca- 
nada is  thus  made  the  pretence  for  the  non-execution  of  the 
Treaty  on  the  part  of  Spain.  "  We  have  thought  proper  (fays 
the  Baron)  to  put  the  Poft  of  Walnut  Hills  in  a  refpe&able 
but  provisional  (late  of  defence,  until  the  United  States,  in- 
formed of  thefe  motives,  by  the  Minifter  Plenipotentiary  of 
his  Majefty  to  whom  we  have  communicated  them,  provide 
againft  thefe  inconveniences ;  and  by  taking  the  proper  fteps  to 
caufe  the  Territory  to  be  refpe&ed,  mall  put  in  our  power  to 
fulfil,  without  danger,  the  articles  of  the  Treaty  concerning 
limits." 

In  this  Proclamation,  the  information  of  the  Englifh  expe- 
dition is  reprefented  as  having  been  communicated  by  the  Ba- 
ron de  Carondelet  to  theSpanifti  Minifter  in  the  United  States  ; 
but  in  his  next  Proclamation,  one  week  afterwards  (May  31  ft) 
he  fets  forth  that  he  had  received  from  that  Minifter  informa- 
tion of  the  expedition  from  Canada,  and,  therefore,  "  had 
judged  it  necelfary  for  the  furety  and  tranquility  of  Lower 
JLouifiana,  to  fufpend  the  evacuation  of  the  Ports  of  Natchez 
and  the  Walnut  Hills."  And  as  early  as  the  firft  of  May,  Go- 
vernor Gayofo,  in  a.  letter  to  Mr.  Ellicott,  publifhed  with  the 


other  documents  laid  before  Congrefs,  at  the  laft  feflion,  affigns 
the  information  before  that  day  received  by  the  Baron  from  the 
Spanifli  Minifter,  of  the  above  pretended  expedition,  as  the 
reafon  for  holding  the  Ports,  and  putting  them  in  a  ftate  of  de- 
fence ;  particularly  the  Walnut  Hills.  In  the  fame  Procla- 
mation (of  which  a  copy  No.  I.  is  annexed)  the  Baron  affedts 
to  confider  the  march  of  a  detachment  of  American  troops  from 
the  Ohio  to  the  ftate  of  TennefTee,  while  it  has  been  intimated, 
as  he  fays,  to  the  Militia  of  Cumberland  to  hold  themfelves 
ready  to  march  at  the  firft  notice,  as  an  evidence  of  a  hoftile 
attack  intended,  even  by  the  United  States,  on  Louifiana. 

The  pretences  for  holding  the  Pofts  in  queftion,  and  delay- 
ing to  run  the  boundary  line,  having  varied  from  time  to  time, 
it  may  be  proper  to  prefent  them  in  one  view. 

— In  the  month  of  March — 

i  ft.  That  it  was  uncertain  whether  the  Forts,  when  eva- 
cuated were  to  be  demolifhed  or  left  (landing. 

2d.  That  it  was  necefiary  to  fecure  the  real  property  to  the 
Inhabitants.  And  both  thefe  points,  it  was  faid,  muft  be  ad- 
juftedby  a  negociation  between  the  two  Governments  of  Spain 
and  the  United  States,  prior  to  the  evacuation  of  the  Pofts. 

3d.  That  they  muft  be  retained  until  the  Spaniih  officers 
were  fure  the  Indians  would  be  pacific. 

— On  the  24th  of  May- — 

4lh.  The  Fnglifh  Expedition  from  Canada,  which  could 
not  proceed  without  violating  the  Territory  of  the  United 
States. 

But  in  the  Proclamation  of  this  date,  the  putting  of  the 
principal  Poft,  that  of  the  Walnut  Hills,  in  a  ftate  of  defence 
wa;- declared  to  be  only  proVifioflal,  arid  until  the  United  States 
fhould  canfe  their  Territory  to  be  refpeoted. 

'  5th.  On  the  -?i(r  of  May,  the  Baron's  fccond  Proclamation 
repeats  the  fame  pretence,  fhe  Enjglifh  expedition,  and  adds  a 
new  one,  That  the  Uinred  States  were  marching  troops,  and 
prepa  ing  the  militia  to  take  the  Spaniih  dominions  by  furprize. 
Further  motives 'are  alfo  affigned — anterior  menaces  by  the 
Commifiioner  Mr.  Ellicott  and  of  Lieutenant  Pope  and  the 
expected  rupture  between  the  United  States  Ind  France.  And 
new  conditions  are  now  mentioned  to  be  performed  by  the 
United  States,  viz:  That  they  fhould,  as  a  neceflary  evidence 
that  they  have  no  hoftile  intentions  ae;ainft  the  Spanifh  Pro- 
vinces, either  leave  the  Poft  of  the  Natchez,  or  the  Walnut 
Hills,  in  poffeflion  of  Spain  as  «  The  only  bulwarks  of  Lower 


8. 

Louifiana  to  Hop  the  courfe  of  the  Britim"  ;  or  give  to  the  Spa- 
niards "  Security  againft  the  article  of  the  Treaty  with  Great- 
Britain  which  expofes  Lower  Louiiiana  to  be  pillaged  and  de- 
ftroyed  down  to  the  Capital.  Then  (fays  the  Baron)  we  will 
deliver  up  the  faid  Pofts,  and  lay  down  our  arms,  which  they 
(the  United  States)  have  forced  us  to  take  up,  by  arming  their 
militia  in  time  of  peace,  and  fending  a  considerable  body  of 
troops  by  round-about  ways  to  furprize  us." 

Pretences  more  frivolous,  or  more  unfounded  and  unwar- 
rantable, were  perhaps  never  urged  as  reafons  to  excufe  a  viola- 
tion of  the  faith  of  Treaties.  Never,  perhaps,  was  conceived 
a  more  abfurd  idea,  than  that  of  marching  troops  from  the 
Ohio  to  the  State  of  TenneiTee,  and  thence  to  the  Natchez, 
in  the  whole  a  tedious,  difficult,  and  expenfive  route  of  many 
hundred  miles,  chiefly  through  a  wildernefs ; — when,  if  the 
United  States  had  any  hoflile  views,  they  had  only  to  collecl: 
their  troops  to  the  Ohio,  and  fufFer  them  to  be  floated  down 
that  River,  and  the  Mifliflppi,  almoft  without  labour,  with 
great  expedition  and  at  fmall  expence,  to  the  country  to  be 
attacked.  But  the  fuggeftion  is  as  falfe  as  it  is  abfurd. 

Neither  does  any  article  of  the  Treaty  between  the  United 
States  and  Great-Britain  (the  Baron  doubtlefs  means  the  Treaty 
of  1 794)  nor  the  explanatory  article  of  1 796,  give  to  Great- 
Britain  any  new  right  reflecting  the  navigation  of  the  Miffi- 
fippi,  and  confequently  do  not  expofe,  more  than  it  was 
before  expofed,  Lower  Louifiana  to  be  pillaged  and  deftroyed 
by  the  BritiOi.  But  this  queftion  having  being  fully  difcuifed 
in  my  letter  of  the  i  yth  of  May  laft  to  the  Spanifh  minifter,  and 
his  reafoning  demonftrated  (as  I  conceive)  to  be  utterly  un- 
founded, it  would  be  a  wafte  of  time  to  add  any  further  obfer- 
vations  upon  it. 

If  the  pods  of  the  Natchez  and  Walnut-Hills  "  are  the  only 
bulwarks  of  Lower  Louifiana,  to  ftop  the  courfe  of  the  Britifh," 
as  the  Baron  aflerts,  and  if,  therefore,  Spain  is  juftifiable  in 
holding  them — fhe  may  retain  them  without  any  limitation  of 
time — for  her  fecurity  in  any  future  war,  as  well  as  in  that 
which  now  exifts.  But  this,  like  all  the  other  reafons  which 
have  been  before  advanced,  is  merely  oftenfible.  The  true 
reufon  is  doubtlefs  developed  by  the  Baron  in  his  proclama- 
tion of  the  31ft  of  May.  The  expectation  of  an  "  immediate  rup- 
ture between  France ,  the  intimate  ally  of  Spain,  and  the  United 
States." 

The  Spanifh  minifter  having  refumed  this  fubjecl:  in  his  let- 
ter to  me  of  the  I  ith  of  July,  his  own  printed  tranflation  of  it, 
and  my  anfwer  of  the  8th  of  Auguft,  are  hereto  annexed  ;  toge- 
ther with  his  letter  of  the  I9th  of  Auguft,  acknowledging  the 


receipt  of  that  anfwer,  and  his  two  fubfequent  letters  of  the 
9th  of  October  ancl  21  ft  of  November.  With  the  lad  it  feems 
proper  to  lay  before  you  a  paper  figned  VERUS,  which  ap- 
peared in  the  Aurora,  printed  by  Benjamin  Franklin  Bache, 
on  the  morning  of  the  23d,  containing  in  fubftance  his  letter 
of  the  22d,  which  I  received  the  preceding  evening,  and  fome 
additional  expreftions  which  the  Minifter  himfelf  deemed  too 
grofs  to  be  addreffed  to  the  government  under  his  proper  fig- 
nature ;  but  which,  under  the  circumftances  here  mentioned, 
mult  neceffarily  be  afcribed  to  him. 

In  his  next  letter,  Mr.  Ellicott  gives  an  account  of  an  infur- 
rection  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Natchez.  A  minute  detail  of 
the  circumftanes  which  gradually  tended  to  produce  this  event, 
he  fays,  would  fill  a  volume.  The  following  relation  is  ex- 
tracted from  his  letter  of  June  2yth.  "  The  delay  (fays  he) 
on  the  part  of  the  Spaniards,  to  carry  the  late  Treaty  between 
his  Catholic  Majefty  and  the  United  States  into  effe£t,  gave 
great  uneafmefs,  which  was  daily  increafed  by  the  Spaniards 
reinforcing  and  repairing  the  Fort  at  this  place  and  the  Walnut 
Hills.  The  people  confidered  thofe  preparations  as  a  determi- 
nation on  the  part  of  Spain  to  retain  the  country,  notwith- 
ftanding  the  late  Treaty.  A  difpofition  was  frequently  mani- 
fefted  to  refift  the  laws  of  Spain  ;  but  they  were,  neverthelefs, 
fubmitted  to  without  a  direct,  oppofition,  until  Friday  the  Qth 
inftant,  when  a  Mr.  Hannan,  a  preacher  among  the  Baptifts, 
was  taken  on  fome  trivial  pretence,  and  confined  by  his  legs 
in  a  fmall  building  within  the  fort.  This  was  confidered  as 
an  attack  upon  the  privileges  of  the  citizens  of  thev  United 
States  (Mr.  Hannan  being  one)  and  a  determination,  at  all 
events,  to  enforce  the  laws,  civil  and  religious,  of  Spain, 
with  rigour.  Under  this  impreffion  the  inhabitants  flew  to 
arms,  and  the  Governor  and  principal  officers  of  government 
took  refuge  in  the  Fort.  Thus  in  lefs  than  ten  hours,  by  an 
unrieceflhry  exertion  of  power,  the  authority  of  the  Governor 
was  confined  to  the  fmall  compafs  of  the  Fort." 

"  Saturday  the  loth,  the  oppofition  to  the  Spanifh  Govern- 
ment had  extended  almoft  over  the  diiirict.  Sunday  the  nth, 
a  number  of  enterprifmg  oppofers  of  the  Spaniili  Government 
called  upon  Lieutenant  Pope  and  myfelf,  and  declared  their 
determination  of  commencing  hoftilities,  in  confequcnce  of 
the  irriprifonment  of  Mr.  Hannan,  and  a  proclamation  of  the 
Baron  de  Carcndeiet  (that  cfthe  31  ft  of  May  before  men- 
tioned) which  they  confidered  as  a  declaration  of  war  againft  the 
United  States :  To  oppofe  them  dire£lly  would  have  put  an  end 
to  our  influence  in  the  Country  ;  and  to  encourage  them,  in 


10. 

my  opinion,  would  have  been  improper,  as  the  United  States 
had  not  extended  their  jurifdiclion  to  this  diflricl:.  I,  there- 
fore, on  my  part,  refolved  to  do  neither ;  but,  to  divert  their 
attention  from  immediate  acts  of  hoiliiity,  propofed  to  them, 
to  make  a  formal  declaration  of  their  being,  by  the  late  Treaty, 
Citizens  of  the  United  States,  that  they  might  have  fome  claim 
to  protection ;  but  at  the  fame  time  not  to  lofe  light  of  their 
perfonal  fafety,  and  act  on  the  defenlive  only.  This  had  the 
effecl  I  expected.  On  the  Evening  of  Monday  the  I2th,  Mr. 
Pope  and  myfelf  received  a  verbal  melfage  from  Governor 
Gayofo,  by  his  Adjutant  Major  Minor,  to  the  following  pur- 
port, "  Gentlemen,  Governor  Gayofo  requefts  the  favour  of 
an  interview  with  you,  all  as  private  Gentlemen  :  the  inter- 
view to  be  without  the  Fort,  to  fee  if  fome  plan  cannot  be 
devifed  to  quiet  the  prefent  duhirbance  in  the  Country."  To 
this  meflage  I  replied,  that  "  I  had  no  objection  to  the  pro- 
pofed interview,  that  I  approved  of  peace,  and  would  join  in 
any  meafures  for  that  purpofe,  confident  with  the  honour  and 
fafety  of  the  people,  who  generally  considered  themfelves  Ci- 
tizens of  the  United  States.1'  Mr.  Pope's  anfvver  was  very 
different,  and  to  the  following  effe&.  "  You  will  pleafe  to  in- 
form Governor  Gayofo  that  I  will  not  agree  to  the  interview, 
nor  have  any  correfpondence  with  him,  but  what  mail  be  offi- 
cial ;  and  I  will  repel  by  force,  any  attempts  that  are  made  to 
imprifon  thofe  who  claim  the  privileges  of  being  Citizens  of 
the  United  States.'5  As  the  meflage  was  jointly  to  Mr.  Pope 
and  myfelf,  and  Mr.  Pope  would  not  attend,  I  informed  Ma- 
jor Minor  that  I  mould  not  attend  alone.  All  my  addrefs  was 
now  exerted  to  avert  the  ftorm,  and  bring  it  to  a  favourable 
iflue  ;  and  I  could  fee  no  mode  fo  likely  to  anfvver  the  purpofe, 
as  meafures  apparently  decided.  Under  this  imprelTion,  about 
10  o'Clock  in  the  Evening,  after  Major  Minor  had  been  with 
us,  I  entered  my  approbation  to  a  letter  written  by  Mr.  Pope 
to  a  large  number  of  the  Inhabitants  of  this  diflricl:,  aiTcmbled 
at  a  Mr.  Belt's,  about  nine  miles  from  this  place*.  On  the 
morning  of  the  I3th,  I  received  a  letter  (No.  2.)  from  Governor 

*  This  letter  from  Lieutenant  Pope  has  fince  been  tranfmitted  by 
Colonel  Anthony  Hutchins  of  the  Natchez,  to  the  Department  of 
Slate,  and  is  as  follows. 

"  Natchez   Camp   nth  June  1797. 
"  Fellow  Citizens  of  the  Diftrift  of  Natchez. 

Having  received  information  that  a  number  of  you  will  be  collected 
at  my  friend  Belt's,  in  conformity  to  an  indirect  invitation  fent  to 
you  for  that  purpofe,  I  have  now  pofitively  to  make  the  declaration 
to  you  that  I  have  made  this  evening  to  Governor  Gayofo,  that  I  will 
at  all  hazards  protect  the  Citizens,  of  the  United  States  from  every  aft 


11. 

Gayofo,  to  which  I  immediately  returned  an  anfwer  [No.  3.) 
The  enfulng  evening  about  it  o'clock,  I  received  a  verbal 
mefTage,  by  Mr.  George  Cochran,  contra&oi*  for  the  United 
States  at  this  poft,  from  Governor  Gayofo,  requeuing  a  private 
interview  with  me  at  the  Hovife  of  Mr.  Gochran  (which  is  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  fort)  at  9  o'Clock  the  next  morning: 
to  this  I  had  no  objection,  as  I  fuppofed  the  objecl  of  the 
internet  v/a*>  to  fall  upon  foine  plan  of  an  accommodation. 
The  next  morning,  being  the  I4th,  I  met  Governor  Gayofo', 
according  to  his  requft.  He  appeared  much  agitated  at  iir;.l, 
but  foon  became  calm,  and  we  entered  upon  the  fubjecl:  of 
the  tumult  in  the  Country:  He  was  defirous  to  know  upon 
what  terms  the  people  would  be  willing  to  difperfe.  I  pro- 
pofed  the  outlines  of  an  accommodation,  to  which  he  acceded. 
In  order  to  prevail  on  Mr.  Pope  to  confcnt  to  an  interview 
with  Governor  Gayofo,  I  fpoke  to  Mr.  Cochran  and  feveral 
other  of  his  friends,  whofe  influence  prevailed,  and  the  inter- 
view took  place  at  the  Government  Houfe,  about  5  o'Clock 
in  the  afternoon  ;  when,  after  fome  difcuflion,  the  Governor 
propofed  the  terms  (No.  4)  on  which  he  was  willing  to  ac- 
commodate with  the  people  :  Mr.  Pope  had  fome  objections, 
but  at  length  withdrew  them.  On  Wednefday  morning  the 
Governor  publifhed  the  Proclamation  (No.  5.)  founded  in  part 
upon  the  terms  which  were  agreed  upon  at  our  interview.  But 
this  Proclamation  had  not  the  defirecl  effe£  ;  in  fome  places 
it  was  torn  to  pieces.  The  words  "  Candid  repentance,"  ren- 
dered the  whole  obnoxious. — The  people  confidered  themfelves 
not  only  Citizens  of  the  United  States,  but  fupportino-  a  virtu- 
ous and  honourable  caufe  ;  and,  therefore,  in  no  need  of  c(  re- 
pentance". As  foon  as  I  difcovered  that  the  Proclamation  had 

of  hoftility — I  mean  all  fuch  as  refide  North  of  the  31  ft  Degree  of  North 
Latitude,  or  within  thirty  nine  miles  due  South  of  the  Natchez.  I  now 
therefore,  call  on  you  in  the  moft  folemn  manner,  to  come  forward, 
aflfert  your  Rights,  and  you  may  rely  on  my  linccre  corroboration  to 
accomplifh  that  defirable  object. 

I  mall  expect  your  affiftance  to  repel  any  troops  or  hoftile  parties 
that  make  an  attempt  to  land  for  the  purpofe  of  reinforcing  this  Garrifon 
or  other  purpofes  detrimental  to  the  Inhabitants  of  this  Country. 

PIERCY  S.  POPE 
Commanding  U.  S.  Troops,  Natchez. 

From  the  prefent  alarming  fituation  of  this  Country  I  fully  approve 
of  Captain  Pope's  letter  of  this  date  to  his  Fellow-Citizens  a'ifenibled 
at  Mr.  Belt's. 

ANDREW  ELLICOTT. 
Commiffioner  U.  S.  nth  June,  1797. 
A  true  Copy,  Examined  per 

THOMAS  M.  GREEN. 


12. 


no  effeft,  I  gave  the  information  to  the  Governor's  Adjutant, 
Major  Minor.  The  bufmefs  now  put  on  a  very  ferious  afpe&, 
and  hoftilities  appeared  inevitable.  By  this  time  the  opposition 
to  the  Spanifh  Government  had  aflumed  fome  form  ;  a  number 
of  refpeclable  militia  companies  had  elected  their  officers,  and 
were  ready  to  take  the  field.  Friday  the  i6th,  it  was  agreed 
that  a  meeting  of  the  principal  Inhabitants  of  the  diftricl:  mould 
be  held  at  Mr.  Belt's  on  Tuefday  the  2oth.  In  the  mean  time 
both  fides  continued  their  preparation.  Companies  of  militia 
were  forming  and  organizing  in  the  Country  ;  and  the  Gover- 
nor exerting  himfelf  by  ftrengthening  and  reinforcing  the  Fort. 
He  called  to  his  aid  every  perfon  who  would  join  him,  either 
through  attachment  or  fear  :  he  was,  neverthelefs  too  weak 
to  attempt  any  offenfive  operations.  On  Saturday,  the  iyth, 
about  10  o'Clock  at  night,  a  Spanifh  patrole  fell  in  with  a 
patrole  from  our  Camp,  and  fired  upon  it,  the  fire  was  returned  ; 
but  I  believe  that  there  was  no  damage  done.  On  Sunday 
Evening,  the  i8th,  I  received  a  verbal  meffage  from  the  Go- 
vernor, by  his  Adjutant,  Major  Minor,  requeuing  a  private 
interview  with  me  the  next  morning,  at  the  Houfe  of  his 
Adjutant ;  to  which  I  confented  without  any  hefitation.  The 
next  morning  h£  left  the  fort  and  rode  by  a  circuitous  route  to 
the  Adjutant's  place,  where  I  joined  him.  Our  converfalion 
immediately  turned  upon  the  State  of  the  Country  ;  he  allured 
me  that  he  was  very  defirous  of  coming  upon  fome  terms  of 
accommodation  ;  and  as  he  underftood  that  I  intended  to  attend 
the  meeting  the  next  day  at  Mr.  Belt's,  he  requefted  that  I 
would  be  fo  good  to  ufe  my  influence  to  bring  about  a  com- 
prornife.  I  told  him  that  was  my  object  ;  and  that  a  plan  had 
already  been  agreed  upon  by  Colonel  Hutch  ins  and  myfelf,  t« 
check,  and  finally  put  an  end  to  the  prefent  difturbance  ;  but 
no  terms  could  now  be  expected  that  were  not  honourable  for 
the  people  :  they  had  felt  their  ftrength,  and  would  only  agree 
to  return  home  by  being  admitted  to  enjoy  a  ftate  of  neutrality, 
fo  far  as  it  reipeded  military  operations,  till  the  late  treaty  be- 
tween his  Catholic  Majefty  and  the  United  States  mould  be 
carried  into  effecT:.  To  this  privilege  I  thought  them  entitled  ; 
but  to  go  farther  would  be  impolitic,  and  probably  attended 
with  ruin  to  individuals,  if  not  to  the  Diftricl:.  As  the  Go- 
vernor did  not  appear  diflatisfied  with  my  obfervations,  I  took 
it  for  granted  he  would  agree  to  a  qualified  neutrality. — On 
Tuefday  the  2oth,  I  attended  the  meeting  at  Mr.  Belt's,  which 
was  large  and  refpe&able. 

Here  it  was  concluded  that  a  Committee  fhould  be  appointed 
to  take  the  fituation  of  the  Country  into  confideration,  and 
make  arrangements  with  the  Governor  for  reftoring  peace  and 


tranquility  ;  which  arrangements  mould,  as  a'greater  fecufity 
to  the  people,  be  ratified  by  the  Governor  General,  the  Baron 
de  Carondelet.  Seven  Gentlemen  were  accordingly  elected  as 
the  Committee,  and  Mr.  Pope  and  myfelf  were  requefted  by 
the  fame  meeting,  unanimoufly,  to  attend  with  them.  The 
Committee  immediately  wrote  a  note  to  the  Governor,  inform- 
ing him  of  their  election  ;  to  which  the  Governor  returned  a 
polite  reply;"  exprefling  his  happinefs  that  this  falutary  mea- 
fure  was  adopted.  "  On  Wednefday  the  21  ft,  the  Committee 
met  and  proceeded  to  bufinefs  ;  and  after  much  deliberation  and 
feveral  interviews  with  the  Governor,  the  propofitions  (No.  6.) 
on  the  22d,  were  agreed  to,  and  confirmed  by  the  parties. 
On  the  fame  day,  Mr.  Pope  and  myfelf  prefented  the  Governor 
our  engagement  (No.  7.)  to  co-operate  with  the  Committee, 
in  preferving  peace  and  good  order  in  the  Country.  On  the 
230!,  the  Governor's  Proclamation  (No.  8)  embracing  the  four 
propofitions  was  published,  which  gave  general  fatisfadtion, 
and  once  more  reftored  tranquility  to  the  Di(tri6t:  thus  ended 
this  tumult,  without  a  fingle  act  of  violence  having  been  com- 
mitted during  the  fufpenfion  of  the  Government  and  Laws,  for 
the  fpace  of  two  weeks.  From  the  Baron  de  Carondelet's 
Proclamation  of  the  3ift  of  May,  it  would  appear  that  I  had 
menaced  the  Spanifh  Government  of  Louifiana.  This  is 
wholly  a  mifreprefentation,  and  calculated  to  anfwer  the  worfl 
of  purpofes.  Ever  fince  I  came  into  this  Country  I  have  been 
a  cultivator  of  peace  and  harmony  between  the  Spanifh  and 
American  Governments,  for  which  I  have  been  frequently 
cenfured  by  many  Citizens  of  the  United  States,  who  have 
come  on  to  this  place  fince  the  ratification  of  the  late  Treaty 
between  the  United  States  and  the  King  of  Spain. — But  when 
the  late  tumult  began,  I  could  not  hefitate  as  to  the  part  I  mould 
take;  and  in  taking  the  part  I  did,  peace  was  my  main  object. 
If  my  endeavours  have  had  the  leaft  fhare  in  bringing  about  the 
honourable  compromife  between  the  Governor  and  the  people, 
•  I  mail  think  myfelf  amply  rewarded  for  the  trouble  and 
anxiety  I  have  experienced  on  that  occafion." 

The  agreement  between  the  Committee  and  Governor  Gay- 
ofo,  was  in  due  time  ratified  by  the  Governor  General,  the 
Baron  de  Carondelet. 

Mr.  Ellicott,  in  his  letter  of  September  i2th  (which  was 
received  the  i6th  of  November)  mentions  that  Governor  Gay- 
ofo  had  fucceeded  the  Baron  de  Carondelet  as  Governor  and 
General  in  Chief  of  Louifiana,  and  gone  to  New-Orleans, 
and  had  committed  the  government  of  the  Natchez  diftrict  to 
major  Stephen  Minor. 


His  communications  relative  to  the  Choclaw  nations,  fhcw 
their  friendly  difpofition  towards  the  United  States,  and  deter- 
mination to  remain  at  peace. 

It  appears  that  there  is  an  unhappy  di (Tendon  among  the  in- 
habitants of  the  Natchez ;  one  party  blaming,  and.  the  other 
decidedly  juftifying  the  conducl  of  Mr.  Ellicott,  as  uniformly 
calculated  to  maintain  the  tranquility  and  happinefs  of  the 
fettlement.  At  the  head  of  the  former  is  Colonel  Anthony 
Hutchins. 

Mr.  Ellicott  pointedly  denies  the  charge  of  the  Spanifh  Mi- 
nifler— That  he  intended  to  get  pofTeflion  of  the  Natchez  fort 
by  furprize  ;  of  which  the  miniver  faid  Governor  Gayofo 
jpofTerTed  the  proofs  ;  and  far  from  evading  an  inquiry,  defires 
Governor  Gayofo  to  furnifh  the  minifter  with  all  the  evidences 
he  potteries  to  fubftantiate  the  charge. 

In  his  next  letter,  dated  the  24th  of  September,  Mr.  Elli- 
cott inclofes  a  refolution  (No.  9.)  of  the  permanent  Commit- 
tee manifesting  their  confidence  in  him,  and  requeuing  him 
to  reprefent  the  prefent  fituation  of  the  Diftricl  to  the  Prefident 
of  the  United  States,  and  alfo  all  the  meafures  which  from  his 
knowledge  of  the  circumftances  of  the  country,  acquired  by 
his  reiidence  there,  he  mall  deem  to  be  conducive  to  its  future 
welfare  ;  "In  the  event  of  the  late  Treaty  between  his  Catholic 
Majefty  and  the  United  States,  being  carried  fully  into  effecV 

Mr.  Ellicott  has  accordingly  exprefTed  his  opinion,  founded 
on  very  cogent  reafons,  that  the  form  of  government  eftablifhed 
for  the  Northweftern  Territory,  will  be  the  moft  proper  for 
the  Natchez  Diftricl: ;  with  the  exception  refpecling  Slaves, 
which  was  admitted  when  the  fame  form  of  Government  was 
given  to  the  Territory  fouth  of  the  river  Ohio,  now  the  State  of 
TennefTee.  His  information  in  this  letter  refpe6Ung  the  titles 
to-the  Lands  held  in  that  Country  by  the  Inhabitants,  will  be 
ufeful  when  the  introduction  of  a  Government  there,  under 
the  authority  of  the  United  States,  mall  be  contemplated. 

By  the  communications  in  this  difpatch,  it  appears  that 
the  permanent  Committee,  which  are  confidered  as  an  im- 
portant part  in  the  prefent  adminiftration  of  the  affairs  of  the 
Natchez  Diftricl,  were  chofen  freely  by  the  inhabitants,  af- 
fembled  with  the  confcntof  the  Governor,  and  that  they  have 
his  approbation  for  their  fteaay  zeal  in  promoting  the  peace  of 
the  Country. 

On  the  28th  of  November,  I  received  Mr.  Ellicott 's  letter 
of  the  yth  of  October,  at  which  time  no  change  h;ad  taken 
place  in  affairs  at  Natchez. 

He  inclofes  the  copy  of  a  letter  from  Governor  Gayofo,  dated 
at  New-Orleans  the  I4th  of  September,  in  anfwer  to  one  from 


Mr.  Ellicott  of  the  6th,  in  which  he  referred  to  the  reprefen- 
tations  of  the  Spanifh  Minifter  in  his  letter  to  me  of  the  24th 
of  June  laft  (which,  with  other  documents,  was  laid  before 
Congrefs  on  the  3d  of  July)  criminating  Mr.  Ellicott 's  conduct 
at  the  Natchez  ;  particularly  that  he  intended  to  poflefs  him- 
felf  of  the  Natchez  fort  by  furprize  ;  and  defired  the  Governor 
to  furnifh  the  Minifter  with  thofe  proofs  which  the  Minifter 
had  aiferted  to  be  in  his  pofTefTion.  In  the  Governor's  anfwer 
of  September  I4th,  he  fays  to  Mr.  Ellicott — "  I  am  fure  the 
proofs  in  my  poffeftion,  that  the  Chevalier  de  Yrujo  refers  to, 
are  the  remainder  of  the  copies  of  your  letters  to  me,  which 
be  then  had  not,  but  long  before  this  muft  have  received.  You 
may  be  aflured  I  never  made  any  other  conftruction  upon  your 
expreftions  than  that  which  may  be  conceived  by  every  perfon 
in  the  United  States." 

In  the  fame  letter  of  September  6th,  Mr.  Ellicott  fays,  "  So 
farxas  I  can  judge  at  prefent,  all  the  obftacles  which  occafion- 
ed  the  delay  on  your  part,  in  afcertainingthe  boundary  lines  be- 
tween his  Catholic  Majefty's  provinces  of  Eaft  and  Weft  Flo- 
rida and  the  Territory  of  the  United  States  are  now  removed : 
I,  therefore,  wifh  to  be  informed  when  you  can  with  conve- 
nience proceed  to  the  running  of  the  lines  above  mentioned." 

The  Governor  in  his  anfwer  of  the  I4th,  fays,  "  Thofe  diffi- 
culties which  alternatively  have  caufed  a  fufpenfion  in  the 
execution  of  that  pajt  of  the  Treaty  between  his  Majefty  and 
the  United  States,  in  which  we  have  the  honor  to  be  concerned, 
JLibfift  yet :  and  the  conduct  of  the  Spanifh  officers  is  completely 
juflified  to  the  world,  by  the  publication  of  Mr.  Blount's  letter 
and  the  correfpondence  between  the  Secretary  of  State  and  Mr., 
Lifton.  Until  the  King,  my  mafter,  has  thofe  aflurances 
which  are  neceffary  from  the  United  States,  to  fecure  the  lafe- 
ty  of  this  Province,  you  cannot  reafcnably  expect  that  I  mould 
be  authorized  to  ?.ct  in  a  different  manner  than  hitherto.  As, 
foon  as  I  receive  orders,  removing  the  prefent  obftacles,  I 
fhall  cheerfully  proceed  to  the  running  of  the  boundary  lines." 

To  this  Mr.  Ellicott  replied,  and  recited  the  obftacles  to  the 
execution  of  the  Treaty  which  -at  different  times  had  been  pre- 
fented  by  the  Spanifh  Governors,  and  which  he  conceived  to. 
be  completely  removed  by  the  declaration  of  the  Prefidcnt  in 
his  meiTage  to  Congrefs,  on  the  i2th  of  June,  the  uniform  coa- 
duct  of  the  United  States  in  refpect  to  the  Indian  nations,  and- 
the  exhibition  of  facts  refpecting  the  pretended  expedition  of 
the  Englifh  from  Canada,  and  the  navigation  of  the  Miffifippi. 

Mr.  Ellicott's  next  letter  is  dated  at  the  Natchez  the  27th  of 
October,  and  was  received  the  5th  inilant.  lie  fays  that  coun- 
try "  Is  in  great  confufion  ;"  owing  to  the  intrigues  which  have 


produced  two  parties  among  the  people,  tic  adds  "  Congrefs' 
at  their  laft  feffion,  by  not  coming  to  any  decifion  relative  to 
this  Territory,  has  weakened  the  intereft  of  the  United  States 
among  the  Inhabitants  more  than  you  can  conceive.  It  has 
been  artfully  propagated,  from  that  circumftance,  that  the 
Treaty  in  all  probability  will  not  be  carried  into  effecl,  and 
the  country  remain  as  heretofore  under  the  jurifdiction  of  his 
Catholic  Majefty:"  which  belief  is  producing  its  natural  con- 
fequences. 

He  reprefents  the  permanent  Committee  as  unwearied  in 
their  endeavours  to  promote  peace  and  good  order,  and  the  cha- 
racters of  its  members  as  among  the  firil  in  that  Country  for 
refpeclability ;  which  is  confirmed  by  the  Certificate  (No.  10} 
of  the  temporary  Governor,  Major  Minor  ;  which  alfo  (hows 
that  they  are  acknowledged,  as  an  authorized  Body,  by  the 
Spaniili  Government. 

His  next  letter  is  dated  at  the  Natchez  the  I4th  of  Novem- 
ber, and  was  received  the  4th  inftant.  He  details  the  different 
fadts  and  circumftances  which  have  led  him  to  think  that  de- 
figns  are  carrying  on  in  the  diftricl:  unfavorable  to  the  Interefts 
gf  the  United  States. 

Colonel  Anthony  Hutchins  prefented  to  the  temporary  Go- 
vernor an  application  dated  the  9th  of  Auguft,  fetting  forth, 
that  altho'  the  Inhabitants  in  general  in  their  prefent  ftate  of 
Neutrality,  are  well  difpofed,  and  fubmit  "  To  the  prefiding 
authority  and  the  prevailing  laws  that  are  now  executed  with 
mildnefs  ;"  yet  conceiving  and  firmly  believing  that  the  Treaty 
between  the  United  States  and  Spain  will  be  carried  into  effecl:, 
"  and  that  there  is  more  than  a  probility  that  the  United  States  will 
avail  tbemf elves  of  the  claim  of  dominion  to  the  ^ift  degree  of  north 
latitude:  under  which  confideration  they  conceive  it  expedient 
to  appoint  a  man  of  fome  abilities,  with  the  appellation  of 
agent  to  addrefs  Congrefs  on  important  occafions,  and  that  there 
may  be  alfo  a  Committee  of  Safety  who  may  correfpond  with 
fuch  Agent,  and  from  time  to  time  communicate  to  him  the 
fenfe  and  will  of  the  people:"  He  therefore,  "  In  behalf  of 
a  very  refpeclable  number  of  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Natchez, 
and  at  their  requeft,  folicits  for  permiflion  that  elections  may 
be  held  in  the  fevcral  diftri6ts  within  that  Province  and  in  the 
town  of  Natchez,  to  elect  fuch  Agent  and  fuch  Committee  of 
fafety  and  Correfpondence  on  the  fecond  of  September"  in  the 
manner  defcribed  by  Colonel  Hutchins  in  his  application. 
This  required  that  the  Alcaldes  (or  Juftices)  fhould  hold  the 
ele&ions,  or  in  their  default  certain  afliftants,  whom  he  names  ; 
and  that  the  Alcaldes  'and  afiiftants  mould  not  be  eligible  :  it 
alfo  propofed  to  admit  as  voters  all  the  inhabitants  fettled  and 


refiding  in  the  diftrict  who  were  "  not  lefs  than  eighteen  years 
of  age.'" 

To  this  requeft  of  Colonel  Hutchms,  the  temporary  Go- 
vernor acceded  ;  as  appears  by  his  act  (No.  u.)  dated  the  i6th 
of  Auguft. 

"  Immediately  upon  this  being  made  public  (fays  Mr,  Elli- 
cott)  it  excited  confiderable  alarm,  and  was  generally  confidered 
by  the  well  difpofed  inhabitants  as  an  artful  mcafure,  calcu- 
lated to  divide  the  people  between  the  two  Committees,  which 
if  effected,  would  in  all  probability  end  in  a  breach  of  the  neu- 
trality by  one  or  other  of  the  parties,  and  thereby  produce  the 
re-eftablifhment  of  the  Spanifh  Government." — Under  this  im- 
preflion,  fix  of  the  ten  fub-divilions,  of  which  this  diitrict  is 
compofed,  protefted  againft  the  election,  of  courfe  there  were 
but  four  elections  held  agreeably  to  the  permiflion" — Among 
the  reafons  affigned  in  the  protefts  againft  this  propofed  elec- 
tion, were  thefe  ;  "  Becaufe  (fay  the  protefters)  we  dread  the 
effect  of  fuch  a  precedent,  which  appears  to  us  to  involve  the 
feeds  of  anarchy,  and  an  open  contempt  of  the  authority  in- 
vefted  in  the  Committee,  our  only  legal  reprefentatives." — 
"  Becaufe  by  the  mode  of  election  not  lefs  than  thirty  of  our 
moft  intelligent  and  refpectable  citizens  are  rendered  incompe- 
tent to  ferve  either  as  the  faid  Agent  or  in  the  Committee." 
"  Becaufe  it  is  calculated  to  introduce  a  direct  innovation  in 
the  principles  of  election,  by  admitting  to  the  privilege  of  vot- 
ing perfons  of  the  age  of  eighteen" — And  "  becaufe  neither  the 
powers  of  the  Agent  nor  Committee  are  properly  defined." 

Mr.  Ellicott  flares  that  the  four  perfons  elected  in  the  other 
four  fub-divifions,  "  with  Colonel  Hutchins  at  their  head," 
proceeded  to  bufinefs.  Afterwards  another  member  was  added 
by  the  nomination  of  ten  voices  in  one  fub-divifion  ;  and  a  fixth 
was  appointed  by  the  fubfcription  of  fewer  than  thirty  perfons. 
The  committee  thus  conftituted,  produced  a  very  long  "  Petition 
and  memorial"  addrefled  to  the  "  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives 
of  the  United  States  in  Congrefs  afTembled,"  of  which  Mr. 
Ellicott  has  tranfmitted  a  copy  ;  but  of  which  it  does  not  feerri 
neceflary  to  anticipate  the  presentation  to  Congrefs  by  the  agent 
to  whom  it  may  for  that  purpofe  be  committed.  One  object 
of  the  memorial  feems  to  be  to  criminate  the  conduct  of  the 
American  CommiMioner,  Mr.  Ellicott,  and  the  commander  of 
the  troops^  Captain  Pope.  But  proofs  accompany  Mr.  Ellicott's 
communications  that  this  part  of  the  long  memorial  was  con- 
cealed from  many  who  fubfcribed  it,  and  other  teftimonies  in 
vindication  of  thofe  officers.  The  exhibition  of  thefe  docu- 
ments, I  have  thought  might  alfo  be  fufpended,  until  the 

\^ 


'«  Petition  and  memorial"  were  prefented  to  Congrefs.  It 
may,  however,  be  proper  to  remark,  that  the  memorial,  as  well 
as  the  proceedings  of  the  regularly  appointed  permanent  com- 
mittee, view  the  aclual  eftablifhment  of  a  government  at  the 
Natchez,  under  the  authority  of  the  United  States,  as  to  take 
place  only  when  its  prefent  ftate  of  neutrality  (hall  ceafe  ;  that 
is,  when  the  Spaniih  jurifdiclion  fliall  be  withdrawn.  But  as 
this  may  happen  when  Congrefs  is  not  in  feflion,  and,  if  in 
feffion,  much  time  muft  elapfe  in  the  ordinary  courfe  of  doing 
bufmefs,  before  the  form  of  government  proper  to  be  introduced 
at  the  Natchez  may  be  agreed  on  ;  confidering  alfo  the  further 
lapfe  of  |ime  before  it  can  be  organized,  and  put  in  operation, 
in  a  country  fo  remote  from  the  feat  of  the  general  government : 
it  appears  highly  expedient  that  the  fubjecl;  fhould  now  be  taken 
up,  and  the  neceftary  arrangements  made,  to  prevent  the  incon- 
veniences and  mifchiefs  which  may  refult  from  leaving  a  popu- 
lation of  five  thoufand  perfons,  for  any  length  of  time,  without 
the  powers  of  government. 

It  remains  for  me  to  make  a  few  remarks  on  the  letters  of 
the  Spaniih  minifter  of  the  9th  of  October  and  2ift  of  No- 
vember. 

The  principal  object  of  the  former,  appears  to  be,  to  intro- 
duce fome  evidence  to  fhow  that  Mr.  Ellicott  and  Lieutenant 
Pope  had  conducted  towards  the  Spanifh  government  in  a 
manner  irregular,  provoking,  infulting,  and  in  fome  degree 
hoftile.  He  adduces,  as  proofs,  the  documents  inclofed  in  his 
letter,  and  numbered  from  i  to  6. 

The  declaration  that  Governor  Gayofo  had  pofitive  advice 
that  in  the  camp  of  Lieutenant  Pope,  fcaling  ladders  and  arms 
were  preparing,  having  for  their  object  an  aflault  on  the  Natchez, 
fort,  is  perfectly  new.  I  have  never  received  an  intimation  of 
it  from  any  other  quarter.  Befides,  this  charge  refts  only  on 
"  pofitive  advice  "  not  pofitive  proof- — and  is  doubtlefs  without 
any  proof. 

Governor  Gayofo,  in  his  letter  of  the  1 3th  of  June  to  Lieu- 
tenant Pope,  fays  he  is  informed  that  fome  of  the  inhabitants 
intended  to  attack  the  fort ;  and  at  his  inftigation  ;  and  aflcs 
whether  he  had  ftirred  up  the  people  to  take  the  fort  ?  or  incited 
them  to  other  hoftile  acts  ?  To  each  of  which  queftions  Lieu- 
tenant Pope  pofitively  anfwers,  no.  To  fimilar  queftions  put  to 
Mr.  Ellicott  he  alfo  peremptorily  anfwers  in  the  negative. 
The  documents  which  the  minifter  himfelf  has  furnifhed  con- 
tain thefe  queftions  and  anfwers ;  and  mould  have  prevented 
the  infmuation  here  noticed. 

The  other  charge  in  the  fame  paragraph,  that  Mr.  Ellicott 
and  Lieutenant  Pope,  difcouraged  by  the  firmnefs  and  vigilance 


of  Governor  Gayofo,  from  attempting  to  take  the  forts  at  the 
Natchez  and  Nogales( Walnut  Hills)  by  force  or  furprize,  they 
availed  themfelves  of  fome  profligate  people  to  excite  an  infur- 
rection,  is  alike  void  of  foundation.  The  rife,  progrefs,  and 
iffue  of  the  infurreclion  is  fatisfaclorily  exhibited  in  Mr.  El- 
licott's  letter  of  June  ayth,  from  which  copious  cxtracls  have 
been  herein  before  given.  And  with  refpedl:  to  the  fort  at 
Walnut  Hills,  they  could  never  have  entertained  the  remoteft 
idea  of  taking  it  in  one  way  or  the  other  :  its  fituation  being 
about  one  hundred  miles  from  the  Natchez,  up  the  Miffifippi, 
and  its  garrifon  compofed  of  a  force  probably  two  or  three  times 
fupcrior  to  that  under  the  command  of  Lieutenant  Pope. 

The  minifler  confiders  as  an  infult  towards  the  Spanifh  go- 
vernment, the  following  expreflion  of  Mr.  Ellicott  in  his  letter 
of  the  1 3th  of  June  to  Governor  Gayofo  :  "  The  people  can- 
not with  propriety  be  ccnfured  for  recurring  to  that  conduct 
which  will  ultimately  fecure  their  felicity."  "  This  (fays  he) 
is  clearly  an  indirect  attack  upon  the  Spanifh  government,  as 
unjuft  as  improper  on  the  part  of  an  agent  of  a  friendly  nation." 
It  may  be  pertinent  here  to  remark,  That  when  Mr.  Ellicott 
was  commifHoned  as  the  agent  of  the  United  States,  nothing 
was  lefs  expected  than  that  he  would  be  obliged  to  enter  upon 
a  tedious  controverfy  with  the  Spaniih  officers  on  fubj eels  really 
foreign  to  the  bufmefs  of  his  million — that  of  running  the  boun- 
dary line  between  the  territories  of  the  two  nations.  If,  after 
waiting  feveral  months  to  begin  that  operation  ;  if,  after  being 
repeatedly  promifed  that  it  ihould  very  foon  be  commenced  ; 
if,  after  repeated  violations  of  thefe  promifes,  and  others  relative 
to  the  evacuation  of  the  forts,  and  p roc rafti nations  reding  on  a 
fucceflion  of  pretences,  frivolous,  unreafonable,  and  unfounded, 
Mr.  Ellicott  Ihould  have  felt  fome  irritation,  and  been  provoked 
to  fome  indifcreet  acts,  it  would  not  be  furprifmg.  Whether, 
however,  any  part  of  his  conduct  merits  the  charader  of  'inclif- 
cretion,  may  be  determined  by  the  documents  now  and  formerly 
exhibited  ;  for  he  has  not  fought  concealment. 

But  if  the  inhabitants  thought,  what  Mr.  Ellicott  exprefTed, 
that  a  change  from  the  jurifdidion  of  Spain  to  that  of  the 
United  States  "  would  ultimately  fecure  their  felicity,"  it  may 
be  accounted  for  by  a  few  fa&s,  which  will  juftify  both  one 
and  the  other. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  Natchez  dif- 
tricl:  confift  chiefly  of  perfons  who  were  formerly  Britiih  fubje&s 
and  their  defcendants,  and  of  emigrants  from  the  United  States. 
All  thefe,  born  and  educated  under  forms  of  government  fo 
efTentially  different  from  that  of  an  abfolute  monarchy  ;  and, 
efpecially,  in  all  criminal  and  civil  caufes,  accuftomed  to  a 


,2O. 

mode  of  trial  peculiarly  dear  to  the  inhabitants  of  England 
and  of  the  United  States,  and  which  the  conftitutions  of  the 
latter  have  fo  formally  and  fcrupuloufly  guarantied,  the  trial  by 
jury  : — the  inhabitants  alfo  being  nearly  all  Proteftants  ;  and  in 
the  United  States,  perfons  of  all  perfuafions  enjoying  the  mod 
perfect  religious  as  well  as  civil  liberty,  they  could  not  be  in- 
different to, — it  is  impoilible  that  they  fhould  not  prefer  a  jurif- 
diction,  which  would  perfectly  fecure  to  them  both  their  civil 
and  religious  rights.  I  need  not  remark,  that,  under  the 
Spanifh  government,  trial  by  jury  is  unknown  ;  and  at  the 
Natchez  the  Governor  was  the  Legiflator  and  the  Judge  ;  and 
regulated  and  retrained  their  civil  and  religious  rights.  As  an 
inftance,  might  be  cited  Governor  Gayofo's  proclamation  of 
the  29th  of  March  1797,  numbered  XV  in  the  documents  which 
were  laid  before  Congrefs  on  the  I2th  of  June  laft.  By  that 
act  he  fufpends  the  collection  of  debts,  and  reflrains  to  private 
meetings  the  exercife  of  any  other  than  the  Catholic  religion. 
Thefe  are  his  wrords — "  This  being  the  feafon  in  which  the 
planters  are  employed  in  preparing  for  an  enfuing  crop,  none 
ihall  be  difturbed  from  that  important  object  on  account  of 
their  depending  debts."  "  Liberty  of  conference  is  hereby 
pofitively  explained  to  be,  that  no  individual  of  this  government 
ihall  be  molefted  on  account  of  religious  principles  ;  and  that 
they  mall  not  be  hindered  in  their  private  meetings;  but  no 
other  public  worjbip  will  be  allowed  but  that  generally  eftablifhed 
in  all  his  majeily's  dominions,  which  is  the  Catholic  religion" 

The  minifler  alfo  complains  that  Mr.  Ellicott  and  Mr.  Pope 
interfered  in  political  matters  ;  becaufe  they  engaged  thein- 
lelves  to  co-operate  with  the  committee  appointed  to  preferve 
the  peace  and  to  obtain  the  due  execution  of  juftice,  and  ap- 
proved of  the  proportions  prefented  to  Governor  Gayofo.  But 
a  recurrence  to  the  foregoing  narrative  extracted  from  Mr, 
Ellicott's  letter  of  the  27th  of  June,  and  the  documents  he  refers 
to,  will  mow  that  both  were  requefted  to  interfere,  and  that 
they  were  called  on  by  the  Governor  to  be  confulted  on  the 
means  of  putting  an  end  to  the  infurrection — and  that  the  refult 
of  that  confultation  was  a  plan  of  accommodation,  a  propofal 
of  meafures  which  (as  afTerted  in  another  document  not  before 
quoted*)  "  through  the  influence  of  Mr.  Ellicott  and  Captain 
Pope  were  adopted. :> 

A  few  words  on  the  Spanifh  minister's  letter  of  the  21  ft  of 
November,  will  conclude  this  report.. 

*  Letter  from  George  Cochran  to  the  permanent  committee,  in  Oc- 
tober. 


21. 

Referring  to  his  letter  of  the  6th  of  May,  and  to  my  anfwer 
of  the  1 7th  (which  are  among  the  documents  laid  before  Con- 
grefs  on  the  ryth  of  May)  he  fays — "  His  Catholic  Majefty 
has  not  obferved  in  the  faid  anfwer  from  you,  any  reafon  to 
induce  him  to  change  his  opinion  concerning  the  injuries  refult- 
ing  to  his  fubjects  from  the  ftipulations  of  the  Englifh  Treaty, 
compared  with  thofe  of  the  Treaty  with  Spain,  as  well  on  the 
fubject  of  the  articles  of  contraband,  as  on  the  principle  adop- 
ted in  ours,  "  That  free  (hips  mail  make  free  goods,  &c." 

"  But  what  has  mod  aftonifhed  his  Majefty,  and  confirmed 
him  in  the  juftice  of  his  pretenfions,  is  what  you  have  faid  in 
your  anfwer  with  regard  to  the  navigation  of  the  Miflifippi." 

It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  difficulties  mould  be  raifed 
and  perfevered  in,  on  qucftions  fo  plain  and  eafy  to  decide. 
Without  entering  again  into  a  particular  difcuffion  of  this  fub- 
ject,  a  fmgle  fact,  which  on  the  lyth  of  May,  I  fuppofed 
probable,  and  which  I  am  now  authorized  to  affert,  is  fuffi- 
cient  to  obviate  all  the  objections  and  arguments  which  have 
been  adduced  by  the  Spanifh  Minifter.  It  is  this — That  when 
the 'Treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Spain  was  negocia- 
ted  by  Mr.  Pinckney  with  the  Prince  of  Peace,  the  latter  was 
furnimed  with  an  entire  copy  of  the  Treaty  of  Amity,  Com- 
merce and  Navigation,  between  the  United  States  and  Great 
Britain :  confequently  it  is  to  the  laft  degree  prepofterous  for 
the  Spanifh  Government  now  to  complain  that  the  Treaty 
•with  Great  Britain  rejected  the  principle  that  "  Free  (hips  made 
free  goods,"  or  that  it  extended  the  lift  of  Contraband.  With 
a  perfect  knowledge  of  the  articles  of  the  Britifh  Treaty  on 
thefe  points,  if  the  Spanifh  Government  had  any  objections  to 
make,  that  was  the  time  ;  and  to  have  refufed  to  enter  into 
different  ftipulations  with  the  United  States  ;  but  having,  not- 
withftanding;,  voluntarily  entered  into  them,  it  cannot  now 
offer  and  infift  on  fuch  objections,  without  a  manifeft  depar- 
ture from  the  principles  of  candour  and  good  faith. 

The  fame  obfervations  will  apply  to  the  queftion  concerning 
the  navigation  of  the  Miflifippi. 

In  the  firft  place,  the  Spanifh  Government,  when  its  Trea- 
ty of  Peace  with  Great  Britain  was  concluded  at  Paris  on  the 
3d  of  September  1783,  by  which  Weft  Florida  was  ceded  to 
"Spain,  well  knew  that  by  the  Provifional  Treaty  between 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States,  concluded  at  Paris  the 
3oth  of  November  1782,  the  articles  of  which  conftituted  the 
definitive  Treaty  of  Peace  between  thefe  two  powers, — it  was 
ftipulated  that  "  The  navigation  of  the  river  Miflifippi,  from 
its  fource  to  the  Ocean,  (hall  forever  remain  free  and  open  to 


22. 


the  fubje&s  of  Great  Britain  and  the  citizens  of  the  United 
States.'5  And  yet  even  this  ftipulation,  which  was  inviolably 
binding  on  the  United  States,  by  the  Provifional  Articles  be- 
fore mentioned,  nine  months  before  Weft  Florida  was  ceded 
to  Spain,  is  now  ftrangely  objected  to  by  the  Spanifh  Minifter, 
and  as  a  reproach  to  the  United  States ! 

In  the  next  place,  when  our  Treaty  with  Spain  was  con- 
cluded on  the  twenty  feventh  of  October  1795,  the  Spanifh 
Government  poflefled  the  like  perfect  knowledge,  that  eleven 
months  preceding,  viz.  on  the  I9th  of  November  1794,  in 
the  Treaty  of  Amity,  Commerce  and  Navigation,  between 
the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  the  above  ftipulation  of 
1782  and  1783  was  recognized  in  thefe  words — "  The  river 
Miffifippi  lhall,  however,  according  to  the  Treaty  of  Peace, 
be  entirely  open  to  both  parties."  And  on  this  occafion  the 
Spaniih  Government  did  object  ;  it  wifhed  the  United  States 
to  enter  into  a  mutual  ftipulation  with  Spain  for  the  purpofe  of 
excluding  Great  Britain  from  the  Navigation  of  the  Miftifippi: 
but  the  Minifter  of  the  United  States  explicitly  refufed  to  do 
it;  and  in  writing  afligned  the  reafon — That  it  would  violate 
the  good  Faith  of  the  United  States  previouily  pledged  to 
Great  Britain  :  and  the  Spanifh  Government  gave  up  this  ob- 
jection, or  the  Minifter  of  the  United  States  would  not  have 
concluded  the  Treaty.  How  truly  aftonifhing  is  it,  after  all 
this,  that  the  United  States  mould  be  reproached  for  the  ftipu- 
lation with  Great  Britain  refpecting  the  Navigation  of  the 
Miffifippi !  And  as  having  thereby  offended  zn&infulted  Spain  ! 
And  how  long  is  our  patience  to  be  abufed  by  fuch  unfounded 
charges  ? 

But  although  the  Chevalier  de  Yrujo,  in  his  argument  upon 
this  point,  refers  alike  to  our  treaty  of  peace  with  Great  Bri- 
tain in  1783,  to  our  treaty  of  Amity,  Commerce,  and  Navi- 
gation in  1794*  and  to  the  explanatory  Article  of  the  latter 
concluded  on  the  4th  of  May  1796,  yet  in  the  end,  as  if  con- 
fcious  that  his  obfervations,  as  applied  to  the  two  former, 
were  impertinent,  he  confines  his  charge  to  the  latter,  and 
fays  that  "  His  Catholic  Majefty  has  juft  motives  for  being 
offended  with  the  Explanatory^  Article  figned  on  the  4th  of  May 
1796."  But  neither  does  this  explanatory  Article  contain  any- 
new  ftipulation.  It  recognifes  the  principle,  that  a  fubfe- 
quent  treaty  cannot  annul  any  ftipulation  of  a  prior  treaty,  and 
declares,  that  the  fubjects  of  His-  Britannic  Majefty  and  the 
Citizens  of  the  United  States,  and  the  Indians  dwelling  on 
either  fide  of  the  boundary  line  between  the  two  powers, 
"  Shall  remain  at  full  liberty  freely  to  pafs  and  repafs,  by 
land  or  inland  navigation,  into  the  refpective  territories  and 


23- 

countries  of  the  contracting  parties,  on  either  fide  of  the  faid 
boundary  line,  and  freely  to  carry  on  trade  and  commerce  with 
each  other,  according  to  the  Jtipulations  of  the  faid  third  article  of 
the  Treaty  of  Amity,  Commerce  and  Navigation :"  Thus  recurring 
to,  and  refting  upon  the  Treaty  of  November  iQth,  1794, 
\vhich,  as  above  obferved,  the  Chevalier  himfelf  finally  aban- 
doned, as  affording  no  caufe  of  complaint,  and  without  which 
the  Explanatory  Article  itfelf  would  be  a  nullity. — 

TIMOTHY  PICKERING. 

Department  of  State  y  January  22,  1798. 


DOCUMENTS.— 


(No.   i.) 

Proclamation  of  the  Baron  de  Cartmdelet  of  the  31/2  cf 
May,    1797. 

THE  Government  being  informed  by  his  Majefty's  AmbafTa- 
dor  to  the  United  States  of  America,  that  an  expedition  allein- 
bled  on  the  lakes  was  intended  to  attack  the  Illinois,  has  judged 
neceflary,  for  the  furety  and  tranquility  of  lower  Louifiana,  to 
fufpend  the  evacuation  of  the  polls  of  Natchez  and  the  Wal- 
nut Hills,  being  the  only  Pods  that  cover  it  ;  the  poiTeffion  of 
which  will  put  the  Englifh  in  a  fituation  to  difturb  and  ravage 
the  Country,  in  cafe  they  render  themfelves  mailers  of  upper 
Louifiana,  with  fo  much  more  facility,  as  by  an  article  ot  the 
Treaty  concluded  pofteriorly  with  Great  Britain,  the  United 
States  acknowledge  that  the  Englifh  may  freely  navigate  and 
frequent  the  pods  belonging  to  the  faid  States,  fituated  on  the 
rivers  in  general,  lakes,  &c.  being  a  man ifeft  contradiction  to 
the  Treaty  concluded  with  Spain,  which  it  appears  to  annul, 
becaufe  by  this  the  United  States  acknowledge  that  no  other 
nation  can  navigate  upon  the  Miflifippi  without  the  confent  of 
Spain. 

Notwithstanding  the  legitimacy  of  thefe  motives,  the  fuf- 
penfion  has  been  reprefented  to  the  Congrefs  of  the  United 
States  with  all  the  neceifary  veracity,  and  intimated  by  our 
orders  to  the  Commiflary  of  limits,  as  well  as  to  the  Com- 
mandant of  the  detachment  of  American  troops  now  at  Natchez. 
We  are  now  informed  that  a  detachment  of  the  Army  of  the 
United  States  cantoned  on  the  Ohio,  are  on  their  way  by  Hol- 
ftein  towards  Natchez,  while  the  militia  of  Cumberland  are  in- 
timated to  hold  themfelves  ready  to  march  at  the  rirft  notice. 

Thefe  hoftile  difpofitions  can  naturally  only  concern  thefe 
provinces,  becaufe  the  United  States  are  in  peace  with  all  the 
Savages.  The  anterior  menaces  of  the  Commiffary  of  limits 
and  the  Commandant  of  the  detachment  of  Americans  now  at 
Natchez  ;  the  immediate  rupture  (and  if  the  American  gazettes 
are  to  be  believed)  already  effected  between  France  our  inti- 
mate Ally  and  the  United  States  ;  engage  us  to  be  on  our  guard 
to  defend  our  property  with  that  valour  and  energy  which  the 

D 


26. 

Inhabitants  of  thefe  provinces  have  manifeftcd  on  all  occafions  ; 
with  the  advantage  and  fuperiority  which  a  knowledge  of  our 
local  fituation  will  procure  and  with  that  confidence  which 
right  and  juftice  infpires.  If  the  Congrefsof  the  United  States 
had  no  hoftile  intention  againft  thefe  Provinces,  they  will  either 
leave  the  Pod  of  Natchez,  or  the  Walnut  Hills,  the  only  Bul- 
warks of  lower  Louifiana  to  flop  the  courfe  of  the  Britifh,  or  if 
that  they  give  us  fecurtiy  againft  the  article  of  the  treaty  with 
Great  Britain  which  jexpofes  lower  Louifiana  to  be  pillaged 
and  deliroyed  down  to  the  Capital,  we  will  then  deliver  up  the 
faid  pofts,  and  lay  down  our  arms  which  they  have  forced  us- 
to  take  up,  by  arming  their  Militia  in  time  of  peace,  and  fend- 
ing a  confiderable  body  of  troops  by  round-about  ways  to  fur- 
prize  us. 

New-Orleans,  yjl  May,  1797. 


(No.  2.) 

Governor  Gayofo  dc  Lemos,  to  Andrew  Elllcott,  Ef quire. 

Natchez,  yum  I3th,  1797. 
S  I  R, 

BY  repeated  informations  and  by  every  appearance  it  feems 
paft  a  doubt  that  a  number  of  the  inhabitants  of  this  govern- 
ment fubjedts  of  his  Majefty  are  at  prefent  in  a  ftate  of  rebellion 
with  the  hoftile  defign  of  attacking  this  fort. 

I  am  informed  that  yefterday  feveral  of  the  faid  infurgents 
were  riding  through  the  country  foliciting  fubfcribers  to  a  lift 
that  already  contained  the  names  of  feveral  perfons  who  de- 
clared themfelves  citizens  of  the  United  States  of  America, 
though  they  are  actually  under  oath  of  allegiance  to  His  Ma- 
jefty, and  under  whofe  dominion  and  protection  they  have  lived 
and  enjoyed  the  benefits  thereof,  and  the  bearers  of  this  lift 
declare  themfelves  commiflioned  by  you  for  that  purpofe. 

I  cannot  prevail  upon  myfelf  to  believe  that  you  have  either 
authorized  or  encouraged  fuch  proceedings,  as  a  conduct  of  that 
nature  would  unavoidably  produce  the  moft  difagreeable  and 
fatal  mifunderftanding  between  our  nations,  and  the  total  de- 
ftruction  of  this  diftrict. 

Therefore  I  requeft  you  to  give  me  fuch  a  pofitive  anfwer 
as  will  enable  me  to  inform  the  Commander  General  of  this 
province  for  the  intelligence  of  His  Majefty,  of  the  part  you 
take  in  thefe  tranfactions  ;  and  mould  you  take 'fuch  an  active 
part  as  it  is  reprefented  you  do,  from  this  moment  I  proteft 


in  the  name  of  the  faid  Commander  General  againft  fuch 
conduct,  and,  make  you  anfvverable  for  the  fatal  confeqtiences 
that  may  enfue.  I  repeat  the  requefl  of  a  pofitive  anfvver  on 
this  fubje6t. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be  with  the  greateft  regard, 
Sir,  your  moll  obedient  humble  fervant, 

MANUEL  GAYOSO  de  LEMOS. 
Hon.  Andrew  Ellicott. 


Andrew  Ellicott,  Ef  quire  >  to  Governor  Gaysfo  de  Lemos. 

Natchez,  June  I3th,  179". 
S  I  R, 

IN  order  to  anfweryour  letter  of  this  day  that  (from  the  fpirh 
of  it)  denies  the  exigence  of  that  principle  which  has  been  the 
object  of  a  long  train  of  difcufTion  between  us,  I  mud  refer  to 
your  letter  dated  the  I2th  of  March  lad.  In  that  letter  you 
admit  not  only  that  Daniel  Clarke's  will  be  about  the  point 
of  demarcation,  but  that  the  Cdmmiflioner  of  His  Catholic 
Majefty  would  in  all  probability  meet  me  at  that  place.  As 
the  treaty  itfelf  was  a  fa&  notorious,  fo  likewife  ought  to  be 
all  the  transactions  attending  it  either  in  direct  performance  or 
open  violation.  The  people  therefore  became  acquainted  with 
thofe  circumftances  that  were  the  refult  either  of  my  obfer- 
vations,  or  the  acquiefcence  of  the  Spanifh  governmemV^They 
were  matters  that  involved  their  felicity,  and  could  not  from 
duty  or  decency  be  withheld.  If  on  the  prefent  oocafion,  the 
people  have  thought  proper  to  adt  in  conformity  to  the  intel- 
ligence received,  which  intelligence  had  the  combined  fanclions 
of  the  agents  of  both  governments  for  its  fupport  —  is  my 
agency  to  be  afcribed,  or  my  condudt  to  be  called  to  account 
with  regard  to  the  effects  ?  A  little  enquiry  into  the  human 
heart,  would  have  enabled  you,  Sir,  to  have  difcovered  a  more 
powerful  caufe  than  any  operation  of  mine  on  the  prefent  oc- 
cafion.  The  people  confidered  themfelves  citizens  of  the 
United  States^-they  had  a  right  to  confider  themfelves  fo  — 
and  they  have  lately  come  forward  individually  to  exprefs  their 
willies  and  mentions. 

After  this  fhort  detail  of  what  is  the  real  caufe  of  the  prefent 
didurbance,  I  might  flatter  myfelf  with  a  complete  acquittal 
on  your  part,  did  not  the  firit  paragraph  of  your  laft  letter 
compel  me  to  form  a  different  conclufion.  On  what  principle 
do  you  ftill  retain  the  idea,  that  the  citizens  of  this  country  are 


28. 

iubje&s  of  His  Catholic  Majefty  ?  Is  there  not  a  compact 
deliberately  entered  into  by  the  two  nations  to  the  contrary  of 
your  opinion  ?  Have  not  you  acknowlcged  me  to  be  the  agent 
of  the  United  States  to  carry  that  compact  into  effect  ?  And 
have  you  not  repeatedly  pledged  your  word  to  co-operate  with 
me  in  that  defirable  object  ?  Here  I  might  with  propriety  afk 
what  human  alfurances  could  have  gone  further  than  thofe 
that  have  been  made  on  your  part  ?  Do  all  folemn  obligations 
between  nations  depend  upon  chance,  or  caprice,  or  is  there 
fuch  a  principle  univerfally  acknowleged  among  different  na- 
tions as  the  law  of  nature  and  nations  ?  If  your  Excellency 
admits  that  there  is  fuch  a  principle  as  national  law,  I  alTert 
that  the  inhabitants  of  this  country  cannot  be  ccnfidered  as 
any  wife  fubje6ts  of  the  Spanifh  monarchy.  If  you  deny  the 
exiftence  of  the  principle,  I  have  only  to  obferve  that  the  people 
cannot  with  propriety  be  cenfured  for  recurring  to  that  conduct, 
which  will  ultimately  fecure  their  felicity. 

I  have  thus  far  proceeded  by  way  of  argument  in  anfwer 
to  your  communication,  from  the  whole  of  which  you  will 
readily  infer  a  very  natural  conclufion,  that  the  delay  op  your 
part,  in  carrying  the  late  treaty  into  effect,  added  to  the  inva- 
riable nature  of  the  human  heart,  have  produced  the  evils  of 
which  you  complain. 

But  fincc  you  demand  a  pofitive  reply  to  the  general  queflion, 
whether  I  am  concerned  in  meafures  deftructive  of  His  Ca- 
tholic Majefty 's  intereft,  or  in  an  attempt  to  attack  the  fort — 
I  give  you  my  honor  that  I  am  not  :  you  have  affifted  me  in 
confirming  the  fentiment  that  this  territory  belongs  to  the  Uni- 
ted States — and  I  do  now  therefore  on  the  part  of  the  faid 
United  States,  as  their  agent,  mod  folemnly  and  pointedly, 
proteft  againft  the  landing  of  any  troops,  or  the  reparation  of 
any  fortifications,  in  this  territory  above  the  31  ft  degree  of 
north  latitude,  as  I  /hall  confider  all  fuch  conduct  as  a  violation 
of  the  treaty,  and  an  immediate  attack,  upon  the  honor  and 
dignity  of  my  country. 

I  fhall  now  finally  obferve,  that  from  your  verbal  meffage 
by  your  Adjutant,  Major  Minor,  I  expected  that  your  Ex- 
cellency would  have  propofed  fome  fcheme  of  accommodation 
that  would  have  been  confident  with  the  juftice,  and  fenti- 
ment, of  the  countries  we  have  the  honor  to  ferve. 

Should  you  have  any  propofals  to  make  for  an  accommo- 
dation, I  allure  you  that  I  feel  every  wifh  to  enter  into  a  dif- 
cuflion  for  that  purpofe. 

I  am,  &c. 

A.  ELLICOTT. 


(No.  4.) 

STATEMENT  of  the  principles  on  which  I  find  myfelf  dif- 
pofed,  according  to  my  duty,  to  put  in  practice  for  the  tran- 
quilityofthe  Country. 

ift.  That  all  the  people  in  general  now  collected  or  are 
collecting  in  bodies,  fhall  dilpcrfe  and  return  to  their  farms  and 
continue  peaceably  their  domeftic  bufmefs. 

2d.  That  by  fo  doing  it  is  warranted  to  them  that  they  fhall 
not  be  profecuted  for  the  prefent  difturbance. 

3d.  That  as  an  explanation,  to  banilh  fome  doubtful  appre- 
henfions  that  perhaps  has  given  rife  to  the  prefent  difturbance, 
I  aiVure  the  public  there  are  no  preparations  againft  them  ; 
that  the  detachment  of  troops  coming  up  the  river  is  not  in- 
tended for  this  place,  and  are  to  proceed  to  their  deftination  ; 
nor  have  I  ordered  any  troops  from  Nogales  to  reinforce  me. 

4th.  That  no  Indians  have  been  called,  that  no  roads  have 
been  or  mall  be  flopped. 

5th.  That  there  is  no  war  declared  between  His  Catholic 
Majefty  and  the  United  States  ;  on  the  contrary  it  is  the  in- 
tention of  his  Majefty  to  continue  the  beft  harmony  between 
the  two  Nations,  in  confequence  thereof  I  have  not  the  leaft 
idea  of  acling  in  a  hoflile  manner  againft  any  force  or  perfons 
belonging  to  the  United  States,  and  whilft  this  good  intelli- 
gence fubfifts  between  the  two  nations,  no  alteration  fhall  be 
made  on  thefe  principles  ;  on  the  contrary,  I  fhall  employ  my 
greateft  exertions  to  make  every  refident  of  this  Government 
as  happy  as  poiFible,  further  I  declare  that  they  fhall  not  be 
embodied  as  Militia,  but  againft  an  invalion  of  this  Country  ; 
and  if  Military  bodies  fhall  be  wanted  out  of  this  Diftricl:,  they 
fhall  only  be  formed  by  volunteers. 

MANUEL  GAYOSO  de  LEMOS. 

Natchez  l^th  June  1797. 


(No.  5.) 

Don  Manuel  Gayofo  de  Lemos,  Brigadier  in  the  Royal  Armies, 
Governor  Military  and  Political  of  Natchez  and  its  dependencies, 
&c.  &f.  &c. 

WHEREAS  the  confufion  in  which  the  Country  is  at  pre- 
fent involved  threatens  the  entire  deft ru 61: ion  of  its  Inhabitants  ; 
jt  is  our  duty  to  employ  every  means  to  fave  them  from  certain 


.30- 

ruin,  which  will  be  inevitable  if  they  do  not  liften  to  the  fa- 
lutary  advice  which  the  Voice  of  humanity  dictates  to  our  con- 
ftant  attention  to  the  welfare  of  every  individual  of  this  Go- 
vernment lenity  in  its  greateft  extent  accompanies  the  obedience 
that  is  required,  and  general  forgivenefs  will  be  the  fruit  of  a 
candid  repentance  ,  and  theexa6t  compliance  with  the  follow- 
ing conditions. 

From  the  day  after  the  publication  of  the  prefent  Procla- 
mation, ail  perfons  collected  in  bodies,  or  are  colle&ing  for 
any  purpofe  not  fanctioned  by  us,  will  immediately  difperfe, 
and  every  individual  retire  to  the  place  of  his  refidence,  attend 
to  his  farm,  or  other  occupation,  in  a  peaceable  manner,  and 
confider  himfelf  in  the  fame  light  as  before  the  prefent  diftur- 
bance,  never  to  aifemble  again  upon  the  fame  principles  as  the 
prefent,  nor  conftder  themfelves  as  bound  to  do  it,  when  called 
upon  fimilar  purpofes,  whilft  under  the  Government  and  laws 
ot  his  Majefty. 

Any  perfon  who  from  attachment  to  the  Government  and 
Laws  of  his  Majefty,  and  with  a  view  to  prevent  the  impend- 
ing calamity,  ihould  have  aftembled  in  bodies  aje  likewife  to 
difperfe. 

No  perfcn  fhall  ever  be  upbraided  on  account  of  his  differing 
in  opinion  with  any  other,  which,  when  net  carried  to  excefs 
is  allowed  to  every  man  ;  when  it  is  not  injurious  to  the  Go- 
vernment, and  consequently  to  the  community  in  general, 

By  fo  complying  a  general  forgivenefs  is  warranted  to  every 
perfon  who  has  been  concerned  in  tjie  prefent  diflurbance,  and 
no  enquiry  (hall  be  made  for  their  names. 

It  has  been  reprefen.ted  to  us  that  the  prefent  commotion  has 
partly  arifen  from  the  following  apprehcnfiens. 

That  a  war  might  be  actually  declared  between  his  Majefty 
and  the  United  States  of  America. 

That  forces  were  accumulating  here  to  treat  with  rigor  thofe 
Inhabitants  who  have  manifeftecl  a  partiality  for  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  and  that  Indians  had  been  called 
upon  for  their  aftiftance. 

That  the  roads  and  water  communications  were  flopped ; 
and  that  the  Inhabitants  were  to  be  compelled  to  embody  into 
Military  Corps. 

To  banifh  thefe  unfounded  apprehenfions  and  finally  tran- 
quillife  the  minds  of  the  people,  we  do  hereby  allure  them  that 
no  war  ex  ids  between  his  Majefty  and  the  United  States  ;  but 
en  the  contrary  the  moft  friendly  intercourfe  is  recommended 
to  both  Nations.  No  forces  are  accumulating  here,  and  thofe 
for  Nogales*  are  for  the  fole  purpofe'  of  oppofmg  an  a£lu,al 

-*  The  Walnut  Hills. 


31- 

enemy.  No  Indians  have  been  called.  No  interruptions  have 
or  dial  1  be  put  to  land  or  water  communications ;  and  under 
the  prefent  lituation  of  this  Country,  no  corps  of  MiUth  ihali 
be  formed  ;  but  if  any  mould  be  wanted,  out  of  the  Diftri&, 
volunteers  only  ihall  be  called  for,  except  in  cafe  of  an  inva- 
fion,  either  by  water  or  by  land  within  the  extent  of  this  Go- 
vernment ;  in  which  cafe  natural  defence  and  general  fafety 
admits  of  no  exceptions. 

The  Alcaldes  in  each  DiftricT:,  or  perfons  commiifioned  for 
the  purpofeofpromulgingthis  Proclamation  are  hereby  ordered 
to  make  it  public  with  all  poflible  expedition,  that  it  may  pro- 
duce the  defirable  good  effeft. 

Given  under  my  hand  and  the  feal  of  my  arms,  and  coun- 
terfigned  by  the  Secretary  of  this  Government. 

MANUEL  GAYOSO  de  LEMOS. 

Natchez  I4*h  June  1797. 

J.  VI  DAL. 


(No.  6.) 

Don  Manuel  Gayofo  de  Lemos,  Brigadier  General  in  the  Ryyal  Ar- 
mies',  Governor  Military  and  Political  cf  Natchez  and  its  depen^ 
dencies,  &c. 

SIR, 

THE  following  proportions  being  unanimoufly  agreed  to  by 
us  the  underwritten  (being  a  Committee  appointed  by  a  very 
numerous  and  refpedlable  meeting  of  the  Inhabitants  of  this 
Diftrift)  and  A.  Ellicott,  Citizen  and  Commiffioner  of  the 
United  States,  and  P.  S.  Pope,  commanding  the  United 
States  troops  on  the  Miflifippi,  are  fubmitted  to  your  Excel- 
lency with  a  requeft  that  you  may  accede  to  and  tranfniit  a 
copy  of  the  fame  to  the  Baron  de  Carondelet,  and  obtain  his 
concurrence  in  order  to  reftore  tranquility  to  this  Diftri6t. 

I  ft.  The  Inhabitants  of  the  diilricl  of  Natchez,  who  under 
the  belief  and  perfuafion  that  they  were  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  agreeably  to  the  late  Treaty,  have  afTembled  and  embo- 
died themfelves,  are  not  to  be  profecuted  or  injured  for  their 
conducT;  on  that  account,  but  to  ftand  exonerated  and  acquitted. 

2d.  The  Inhabitants  of  the  Government  aforefaid  above  the 
31  ft  degree  of  North  Latitude,  are  not  to  be  embodied  as  Mi- 
litia, or  called  upon  to  aid  in  any  military  operation  except  in 
cafe  of  an  Indian  invafion,  or  for  the  fuppreffion  of  riots  during 


the  prefent  ftate  of  uncertainty,  owing  to  the  late  treaty  be- 
tween the  United  States  and  His  Catholic  Majefty  not  being 
fully  carried  into  effect:. 

3d.  The  laws  of  Spain  in  the  above  Di(t.rict  lhall  be  conti- 
nued, and  on  all  occafions  be  executed  with  mildnefs  and  mo- 
deration, norfhall  any  of  the  Inhabitants  be  tranfported  as  pri- 
foners  out  of  this  Government  on  any  pretext  whatever,  and 
notwithstanding  the  operation  of  the  law  aforelaid  is  hereby 
admitted,  yet  the  Inhabitants  mail  be  confidered  to  be  in  an 
actual  (late  of  neutrality  during  the  continuance  of  their  un- 
certainty, as  mentioned  in  the  fecond  proportion. 

4th.  The  Committee  afore faid  do  engage  to  recommend  it  to 
our  Constituents,  and  to  the  utmofi  of  ou-r  power  endeavour  to 
preferve  the  peace  and  promote  the  due  execution  of  jultice. 

We  are  your  moil  Obedient  and 

Humble  Servants, 

A.  HUTCHINS, 
BERNARD  LINTOT, 
ISAAC  GUILLARD, 
CATO  WEST, 
WILLIAM  RATLIFF, 
GABRIEL  BONOIST, 
JOSEPH  BERNARD. 
Natchez,  June  22</,  1797. 

Don  Manuel  Gayofo  de  Lemos,  Brigadier  General  in  the  Royal  Ar- 
mies of  Spain,  Governor  Military  and  Political  of  Natchez  and 
its  dependencies,  &c. 

I  DO  hereby  accede  to  the  four  foregoing  propofitions  efta- 
blifhed  and  agreed  upon  for  the  purpofe  of  re-eftablifhing  the 
peace  and  tranquility  of  this  Country  ;  and  that  it  may  be  con- 
jftant  and  notorious  I  fign  the  prefent  under  the  Seal  of  my 
Arms  and  counterfigned  by  the  Secretary  of  this  Government. 

At  Government  Houfe,  Natchez, 
12d  June,   1797. 

MANUEL  GAYOSO  de  LEMOS. 

By  His  Excellency's  command, 

JH.  VIDAL. 
A  true  Copy  from 
the  Original. 

D.  GILLESPY,  Sec'ry. 


33' 


(No.  7.) 

'WE' the  underwritten  do  engage  to  co-operate  with  the 
Committee  appointed  by  a  numerous  and  refpeclable  meeting 
of  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Diltrid  of  Natchez,  to  preferve  the 
peace  and  to  obtain  the  due  execution  of  jr.itice,  and  do  here- 
by approve  of  the  proportions  prefented  Governor  Gayofo  by 
the  (aid  Committee  and  acceded  to  by. him. 

A     ITT  T  T/^rrrT  /  Citizen  and  Commiflioner 
**\     of  the  United  State. 

(  Commanding  the  United 
P.  S.  POPE,  <     States  troops  on  the  Mif- 
(^    iiiippi. 

June  22dy   1797. 


(No.  8.) 


Don  Manuel  Gay  if o  de  Lemos,  General  In  the  Royal  Armies,  Gover- 
Kir  Military  and  Political  of  Natchez  and  its  dependencies,  &c. 
fcff .  &f. 

WHEREAS  the  threatening  calamities  to  which  the  Inha- 
bitants of  this  DiftricT:  have  been  lately  expofed,  did  awake  the 
zeal  of  every  individual  and  roufe  them  to  feek  the  molt  effica- 
cious means  of  re-eftablifhin£j  good  order,  and  that  tranquility 
•which  for  many  days  was  loft  ;  the  good  fenfe  of  a  number  of 
the  Inhabitants  dictated  to  them  the  neceffity  of  a  Convention, 
in  which  they  chofe  perfons  of  the  inoft  notorious  probity  and 
intelligence  as  a  Committee  to  co-operate  with  us  towards  the 
re-eftablifhing  of  the  public  peace  and  tranquility ;  and  the 
members  of  the  faid  Committee  having  met  at  Natchez,  after 
due  deliberations  and  confultations,  ftated  and  prefented  us  the 
following  propofitions,  in  the  terms  and  form  here  expreiTed, 
to  wit.  [Then  follow  the  propofitions  No.  6.] 

Being  always  defirous  of  promoting  the  public  good,  we  do 
join  in  the  fame  fentiment  with  the  Committee,  by  acceding  to 
their  propofitions  in  a  manner  following  [fee  the  propofitions 
No.  6.] 

(Signed)    MANUEL  GAYOSO  d-  LEMOS. 

JOSEPH   VI  DAL,  Secretary, 
Natchez,   June  22^,  1797. 

E  . 


34- 

(No.  9.) 

S  I  R, 

THE  many  proofs  that  the  Committee  has  of  your  defire  t® 
contribute  to  the    welfare  of  this  Country,  encourage   it  to 
requeft  of  you  the  fervice  mentioned  in  our  firft  refolve  of  yef* 
terday,  of  which  it  inclofes  you  a  copy. 
I  have  the  honor  to  be,  Sir, 

Your  moft  humble  and  obedient  Servant, 

JOSEPH  BERNARD, 

Chairman. 
Committee  Room,  Sept.  i^th,  1797. 

The  Honorable  Andrew  Ellicott,  Efquire,"^ 
Commifiioner  of  the  United  States  for  > 
running  the  boundary  line,  &c.  J 

Refolved,  i.  That  the  5th  refolve  of  the  29th  ult.  be  refcinded, 
and  that  Mr.  Ellicott  whofe  inclination  for  the  intereft  and  hap- 
pinefs  of  this  country  we  have  a  convincing  proof  of  in  his 
former  communications  to  the  general  Government,  publifhed 
fmce  and  now  in  our  hands,  and  who,  from  his  refidence  for 
feveral  months  amongft  us  is  well  acquainted  with  the  circum- 
ftances  of  this  Country,  be  requefted  to  reprefent  our  prefent 
fituation  to  his  Excellency  the  Prefident  of  the  United  States, 
and  likewife  all  the  meafures  which  he  mail  deem  to  be  condu- 
cive to  the  future  welfare  of  this  Country  in  the  event  of  the 
late  treaty  between  His  Catholic  Majefty  and  the  United  States 
being  carried  fully  into  effecl:. 

True  Copy. 

G.  BENOIST,  Secretary. 


(No.   10.) 


Don  Stephen  Minor 9  Captain  in  the  Royal  Armies,  Aid,  Major  and 
Governor,  pro  tern,  of  the  Natchez  and  its  dependencies,  &c. 

I  DO  certify  that  Colonel  Peter  Bryan  Bruin,  Daniel  Clark, 
Jofeph  Barnard,  Frederick  Kimball,  Gabriel  Benoift,  Ifaac 
Gaillard,  Philander  Smith,  Roger  Dixon  and  William  Ratliff, 
Efquires,  members  of  the  Permanent  Committee,  duly  elected 
by  the  people  at  large,  under  the  fandion  of  Government,  are 
the  true  and  ible  reprefentatives  of  the  Inhabitants  of  this  G©- 


35- 

vernment,  and  that  faith  is  due  to  their  proceedings  as  fuch,  as 
alfo  to  the  reprefentations  they  may  make  in  behalf  of  the  pub- 
lic in  all  cafes. 

In  Teftimony  whereof  I   have  hereunto  fet  my 
hand  and  affixed  my  feal,    at  Government  Houfc, 
(L.  S.)    Natchez,  this  'fixteenth  day  of  September,  one  thou- 
fand  feven  hundred  and  ninety  feven. 

STEPHEN  MINOR. 

I  do  certify  that  the  above  is  a  true  copy  of  a  Certificate 
obtained  from  Governor  Minor,  by  the  Committee,  and  lodged 
among  their  files. 

D.  GILLESPIE, 

Secretary  to  the  American  Commif-  \ 
fioner  and  permanent  Committee.  / 


(No.   11.) 

Stephen  Minor,  Efquire,  Captain  in  the  Royal  Armies,  and  Go- 
vernor of  the  Natchez  for  the  time  being. 

IT  being  the  undeniable  and  unalienable  right  of  Free- 
men, to  aflemble  in  an  orderly  and  peaceable  manner  for  the 
purpofe  of  confulting  and  deliberating  on  their  mutual  intereft, 
no  oppofition  {hall  be  made  by  the  officers  of  his  Catholic  Ma- 
jefty  to  any  affembly,  whether  partial  or  general,  of  the  inha- 
bitants refiding  in  this  diftrift,  if  conducted  upon  the  princi- 
ples of  good  order  and  decorum. 

I  do  therefore  hereby  grant  permiflion  for  the  aflemblies  or 
meetings,  required  in  this  addrefs,  to  take  place  on  the  day 
appointed  and  in  manner  recommended. 

STEPHEN  MINOR. 

Augujl  16,  1797. 


(No.   12.) 

'The  Chevalier  de  Trujo,  Minlfter  Plenipotentiary  of  his  Catholic 
Majejiy,  &c.  &c.  to  Timothy  Pickering,  Efquire,  Secretary 
of  State. 

S  I  R, 

YOUR  additional  report  to  the  Prefident   of  the   United 

States  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Officers  of  the  King  of  Spain, 

in  relation  to  the  poft  and  the  running  of  the  boundary  line, 

I  which  I  find  pub  limed  in  all  the  newfpapers,  obliges  me  to 


36- 

trouble  you  with  this  letter.  If  your  difcufiion  of  facts  had 
been  as  correct  and  impartial  as  there  was  reafon  to  expect,  I 
mould  not  have  been  under  the  neceffity  of  undertaking  this  talk ; 
but  the  conftruction  which  you  are  plcafed  to  put  upon  every 
act  of  the  Spanifh  Officers  in  general,  and  efpecially  upon  thofe 
in  which  I  am  perfonally  concerned,  compels  me  toobferve  up- 
on feveral  expreffions,  which  I  have  noticed  in  your  laid  Report, 

You  begin,  Sir,  with  faying,  "  that  altho'  I  had  declared 
I  had  juft  reafons  for  fufpecting  an  expedition  from  Canada 
\vas  preparing  by  the  Britifh  againft  the  upper  parts  of 
Louifiana,  yet  I  never  had  mentioned  a  fmgle  fact  or  reafon 
on  which  my  fufpicion  was  founded." — In  my  letter  of  the  2d 
of  March,  I  pointed  out  to  you  the  probable  route  which  the 
expedition  would  take,  and  in  our  conference  of  the  2yth  of 
February,  I  gave  you  information  that  a  corps  of  350  men  had 
been  railed  at  Montreal,  and  marched  towards  the  Lakes, 
where,  after  the  evacuation  of  the  American  fort?,  there  was 
no  often flble  object  for  them.  I  alfo  told  you  that  I  knew  that 
the  Briiith  Agents  had  treated  with  fome  of  the  Indian  Nations 
in  that  country,  concerning  the  intended  expedition,  and  I 
added,  that  I  had  received  thofe  advices  from  a  perfon  who 
might  be  depended  on,  who  had  feen  thofe  new  levies  paffing 
thro'  Johnftown,  on  their  way  to  the  weftward.  But,  even 
fuppoimg  that  I  had  not  entered  into  any  particalars,  even 
ftippoing  that  my  information  at  that  period  was  not  com- 
plete, yet  did  not  the  intereft  and  dignity  of  this  Government 
—did  not  its  friendly  connection  with  Spain,  require  that  it 
mould  have  taken  every  proper  means  to  prevent  the  attempt 
we  were  threatened  with,  by  giving  fuitable  orders  to  Gene- 
ral Wilkinfon,  or  to  the  Commanding  Officers  of  the  Mili- 
tary Force  on  thofe  frontiers  ?  The  abfolute  filence  in  this 
particular  of  the  documents  which  accompany  the  Report  of 
the  Secretary  of  \V  ar,  your  never  having  communicated  to  me 
any  determinate  difpofition  on  this  point,  as  you  do  in  your  an- 
fwer  to  my  letter,  which  in  the  publication  is  marked  No.  7. 
afford  me  fufficient  grounds  to  fear  that  thefe  precautions  were 
omitted.  ^  You  add,  Sir,  with  a  degree  of  candour  difficult  to 
be  conceived,  that  from  my  not  having  given  to  you  detailed 
information  refpecting  the  expedition,  and  from  the  anfwer 
which  you  received  on  the  io,th  ultimo,  from  the  Britifh  Mini- 
jler,  you  believed  my  fufpicions  to  be  groundlefs.  Is  it  poffi- 
ble,  that  any  one  will  candidly  imagine,  that  if  the  Engliih 
intended  to  violate  the  territory  of  the  United  States,  in  order 
to  effect  a  coup  de  mam,  they  would  be  as  ingenious  in  anfwer- 
ing,  as  you  were  in  afking  their  Minifter  the  queftion  ? 

I  mail  riot  enter  into  all  the   obfervations  which   iuggeft 


37- 

themfelves  to  my  mind  from  your  having  communicated  to 
Mr.  Lifton  the  contents  of  my  letters.  I  expected  that  the 
American  Government  would  have  watched  his  motions,  and 
taken  the  means  which  I  have  already  mentioned  to  prevent  the 
fuccefs  of  a  fimilar  enterprize  ;  but  I  never  could  have  imagin- 
ed that  you  would  have  given  to  the  Britifh  Minifler  a  piece  of 
advice,  which  might  enable  him  to  alter  his  plan,  by  .letting 
him  know  that  the  former  one  was  discovered.  By  the  line  of 
conduct  which  you  have  perfued  in  this  bufmefs,  I  am  con- 
vinced, that  had  I  communicated  to  you  more  particular  de- 
tails refpecting  this  tranfaction,  you  would,  with  the  fame 
good-natured  franknefs,  have  given  information  of  them  to 
Mr.  Lifton. 

But,  if  you  did  believe  that  afking  this  queftion  of  the  Britifh 
Envoy  was  the  mod  efficacious  means  to  prevent  the  violation 
of  the  neutrality  of  the  United  States,  and  the  invafion  of  the 
Spanifh  territory,  let  me  afk  why  you  was  lo  rcmiis  in  this 
meafure,  that  although  I  had  communicated  this  project  to  you 
verbally,  on  the  27th  of  February,  and  on  the  2d  of  March, 
in  writing;;,  yet,  in  a  matter  obvioully  fo  urgent,  you  only  wrote 
to  the  Britifh.  Envoy  on  the  28th  of  April,  that  ij,  t-iw*  ninths 
afterwards  r 

I  ihall  not  quit  this  fubje^,  without  taking  the  liberty  of 
making  to  you  one  obfervatinn  which  is  intimately  count 
with  it.  By  the  date  of  the  letter  I  have  juil  mentioned,  it 
evidently  appears  that  I  gave  you  advice  of  this  intended  expe- 
dition on  the  fecond  of  March,  and  that  three  days  before y  I  had 
given  you  the  fame  information,  verbally.  I  imagined  from 
your  known  attention  to  bufinefs,  and  the  importance  of  the 
fubject,  that  you  would  have  fubmitted  it  immediately  to  the 
confederation  of  the  Prelident  of  the  United  States.  On  the  qth 
of  March,  I  had  the  honor  of  (peaking  to  Mr.  Adams,  at  his 
lodgings  at  Francis's  Hotel,  and  mentioned  this  fubjecl;  as  a 
matter  that  I  {uppofed  him  already  fully  informed  of;  arid,  it 
was  with  no  fmall  furprize  I  heard  him  fay,  that  he  knew 
nothing  about  it.  I  produced  the  map,  which  I  had  in  my 
pccket-book,  and  he  liftened  with  great  attention  to  all  that 
I  had  to  fay  to  him.  It  was  no  doubt  to  this  conference  with 
Mr.  Adams,  that  I  was  indebted  to  your  anfwer  of  the  nth 
of  the  fame  month.  I  mail  entirely  abftain  from  putting  any 
construction  upon  the  reafons  which  induced  you  to  omit  mak- 
ing this  communication  to  the  Preiident ;  but  they  mud  have 
been  very  powerful  motives  which  could  oblige  you  to  remain  fl> 
long  filent  on  a  matter  of  fuch  importance. 

You  fay,  in  the  third  paragraph  of  your  Report,  that  on  your 
afking  me  what  meafures  Spain  had  taken  in  order  to  carry  into 


execution  that  part  of  the  Treaty  which  relates  to  the  with- 
drawing the  garrifons,  I  anfwered  you  on  the  I  ^th  of  April, 
that  I  had  been  for  fome  months  without  receiving  letters  from 
the  Baron,  and  confequently  "  was  entirely  ignorant  of  the 
fteps  which  had  been  taken  for  the  execution  of  the  Treaty." — 
From  this  expreflion,  which,  in  order  to  draw  attention,  you 
place  between  inverted  commas,  you  infmuate  an  inference 
which  in  my  opinion  is  very  far  from  being  true,  when  you 
add,  immediately  afterwards  :  "  Nevertheless,  he  had  previouJJy 
Informed  the  Baron  of  his  fufpicions  of  a  projected  expedition." — 
What  is  tliis  to  prove,  Sir  ?  That  the  Baron  indeed  had  re- 
ceived my  letters,  but  not  that  I  had  received  his.  The  irre- 
gularity and  uncertainty  of  navigation  eafily  ihows  that  your 
logic  on  this  point  is  extremely  falfe. 

In  the  lifth  paragraph,  after  giving  an  account  of  my  letter 
of  the  24th  ultimo,  and  of  its  object,  you  obferve  that  I  have 
omitted  to  mention,  among  the  other  complaints  of  the  Baron 
that  of  Mr.  Eliicott's  not  having  given  him  notice  of  his  arrival 
at  Natchez. — Permit  me,  Sir,  to  reprefent  to  you,  that  you 
have  entirely  miftaken  what  I  had  the  honor  of  telling  you  on 
that  occafion, — for  I  fimply  mentioned,  not  as  a  complaint,  but 
as  a  mere  obfervation,  that  the  Baron,  in  the  rigour,  might  not 
have  coniidered  Mr.  Ellicott  as  an  American  Corn  mifti  oner, 
for  not  having  given  him  on  his  arrival  official  notice  of  his  ap- 
pointment, having  merely  informed  him  of  it  in  the  way  of  a 
confidential  communication.  You  cannot  be  ignorant,  Sir, 
that  there  are  certain  requifite  formalities  when  Nations  treat 
with  one  another  of  their  mutual  concerns,  which  are  not  re- 
quired between  individuals.  The  Baron,  when  he  fpeaks  in 
this  manner,  clearly  points  out  his  meaning,  that,  befides  the 
confidential  letter,  the  communication  of  which  you  conjider  as 
Jo  important,  no  doubt  he  expected  another  official  one,  includ- 
ing his  Commiflion,  Authority,  or  fome  other  document,  to 
afcertain  the  identity  of  the  perfon,  and  the  object  of  his  mif- 
fion.  When,  on  my  arrival  in  this  country,  I  had  not  yet 
prefented  my  credentials  to  the  Prefident,  although  I  had  de- 
livered to  you  a  copy  of  them,  you  might,  in  the  rigour,  not 
have  recognized  me  as  the  Envoy  Extraordinary  of  the  King 
my  Mailer,  for  want  of  having  complied  with  that  necefTary 
requifite  of  the  eftabifhed  etiquette.  I  do  not  mean  to  fay  that 
in  the  prefent  cafe  it  was  absolutely  neceflary  to  go  through  a 
fimilar  formality  ;  nor  did  the  Baron  mention  this  but  as  a  mere 
matter  of  obfervaticn,  which  was  not  to  affect:  the  object  in  quef- 
tion,  although  you,  thinking  that  it  affords  you  a  victorious 
argument,  are  pleafed  to  give  to  this  circumftance  an  impor- 
tance which  it  does  not  deferve.  Befides,  Sir,  I  might  ob- 


39- 

ferve  to  you,  that  when,  after  a  mixed  and  defultory  conver- 
fation  upon  various  fubjects,  I  had  collected  and  methodized 
my  ideas,  and  committed  them  to  writing,  your  anfwer  and 
obfervations  ought  to  have  been  confined  to  the  written  com- 
munication, clothed  with  all  the  neceffary  formalities;  but 
neither  do  I  wiih  to  make  of  this  an  object  of  difcuflion. 

The  proof  which  you  give  in  the  fixth  paragraph  of  your 
Report,  to  mew  that  it  is  not  certain  that  Mr.  Ellicott  intended 
to  get  poffeflion  of  Natchez  by  furprize,  and  that  for  that  pur- 
pofe  he  had  endeavoured  to  gain  over  the  inhabitants,  is  merely 
negative.  From  your  examination  of  the  two  perfons  you 
mention,  you  had  very  little  to  expect :  the  circumftance  alone 
of  their  being  the  bearers  of  Mr.  Ellicott's  difpatches,  points 
out  that  they  were  both  in  his  confidence;  and  it  may  be  pre- 
fumed  without  temerity,  that  being  his  friends,  or  employed 
under  his  orders,  they  would  hardly  make  a  denunciation  that 
might  be  prejudicial  to  him.  Governor  Gayofo  declares  that 
he  has  proofs  of  the  fact  in  his  power.  I  ihallnot  fail  to  apply 
to  him  for  them,  and  perhaps  I  may  one  day  fpeak  to  you 
more  pofitively  on  this  bufmeis. 

After  having  difcuffed  the  hiftory  of  thefe  tranfactions  with 
all  the  force  and  accuracy  which  refult  from  thefe  obfervations, 
you  allure  with  a  very  ill-grounded  confidence,  that  upon  a 
view  of  the  whole  it  appears  that  His  Majefty's  Governors  on 
the  Miflifippi,  have,  on  various  pretences,  poftponed  the  run- 
ning of  the  boundary  line  and  the  evacuation  of  the  pofts.  But 
I  appeal  to  that  candour  which  you  have  fo  generoufly  fhewn 
to  the  Britifh  Minifler,  that  you  may  tell  me,  whether  it  can 
be  called  a  pretence,  that  the  Baron  de  Carondelet,  who  was 
entrufted  with  the  fafety  of  Louifiana,  refufed  to  carry  into 
execution  a  pretention  that  ^uas  not  ftipulated  for  by  the  treaty  ? 
By  the  fecond  article  it  is  only  agreed  that  the  garrlfons  (hall  be 
withdrawn ;  and  as  I  had  the  honor  of  reprefenting  to  you  in 
my  letter  of  the  24th  ultimo,  it  is  not  to  be  prefumed  that 
it  could  ever  have  been  the  intention  of  his  Catholic  Majefty  to 
deliver  up  fortifications,  which,  befides  that  they  have  coft  him 
confiderable  fums  of  money,  may  by  the  effect  of  political  vi- 
ciflitudes,  be  one  day  prejudicial  to  his  fubjects.  If  not  to  do 
what  was  not  ftipulated  for,  and  the  execution  of  which  would 
be  contrary  to  the  interefts  of  Spain,  is  a  pretence,  we  mult 
confefs  that  it  is  a  very  plaufible  one. 

With  refpect  to  the  line  of  demarcation,  it  appears  by  the 
cofrefpondence  and  letters  of  the  Baron  de  Carondelet,  which 
are  in  my  pofleflion,  that  although  he  entertained  the  fame 
doubts  which  were  fuggefted  by  Governor  Gayofo  refpecting 
the  pofts,  yet  he  was  confenting,  that  the  aftronomical  obfer- 


40. 

vations  fhouldbe  begun  upon,  for  which  purpofe  the  Engineer 
Mr.  de  Guillemand  had  already  arrived  at  the  Natchez,  with 
all  the  inftruments  and  apparatus.  Such  was  the  fituation  of 
things  when  my  communications  refpe&ing  the  intended  expe- 
dition got  to  hand  ;  from  that  moment  imperious  neceflity, 
and  the  great  principle  of  felf-defence,  made  His  Catholic 
Majefty's  Officers  turn  their  thoughts  to  objects  of  a  more  ur- 
gent nature.  Mr.  Blount's  letter,  and  the  late  detected  con- 
fpiracy,  evince  how  far  their  conduct  in  this  refpecl:  was  ne- 
ceffary  ;  and  you,  Sir,  pofleft  as  you  were,  of  all  the  facts, 
when  you  laid  the  facts  before  the  Prefident,  ought  to  have 
been  one  of  the  laft  to  have  ftigmatized  the  motives  with  the 
epithet  of  pretexts.  So  palpable  an  attempt  to  make  ground- 
lefsand  unfair  impreffions  on  the  public  mind,  is  well  calcu- 
lated to  defeat  its  own  ends,  and  appear  (till  more  extraordi- 
nary when  we  confider  that  the  American  Government  is  in 
every  way  anxious,  by  its  own  confeffion,  to  maintain  peace 
and  harmony  with  Spain. 

Nor  do  your  ill-founded  infinuations  ftop  here :  fentiments 
and  expreflions  ftill  more  violent,  flow  from  that  fame  hafty 
pen.  You  fay  in  another  part,  that  there  is  but  too  much  reafon 
to  believe  Mr.  Ellicott's  fufpicions  well-founded,  that  an  undue 
influence  has  been  exercifed  over  the  Indians  by  the  Officers  of  his 
Catholic  Majefty,  to  prepare  them  for  a  rupture  with  the  United 
States.  Fortunately,  Sir,  you  have  told  us  the  fource  whence 
you  derived  all  thofe  dreadful  conjectures  of  your's;  other- 
wife,  perhaps,  the  weight  and  authority  which  your  high 
official  character  ftamps  upon  whatever  you  write  or  fay, 
might  make  an  undue  impreffion  on  the  public.  You  acknow- 
ledge, Sir,  'twas  a  private  letter  of  Mr.  Sargent's  (Secretary 
of  the  North-weftern  Territory)  that  gave  rife  to  your  furmi- 
fes :  we  ihall  now  fee  what  the  letter  lays. 

[  No.  14.  ] 

Extract  of  a  letter  from  Winthrop  Sargent,  Ef quire.  Secretary  of 
the  North-weftern  Territory,  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  dated 
Cincinnati,  June  ^d,  1797. 

GENERAL  WILKINSON  fending  off  an  exprefs,  I  feize 
the  occafion  to  tranfcribe  for  you  fome  paragraphs  from  a 
weftern  letter. 

"  The  Spaniards  are  reinforcing  their  upper  pofts  on  the 
Miflifippi  considerably.     General  Howard,    an  Irifhman,  in 
quality  of  Commander  in  Chief,  with  upwards  of  three  hun- 
dred men,  is  arrived  at  St.  Louis,  and  employed  in  erecting 
very  formidable  works.     It  Hkewife  appears  through  various 


channels,  that  they  are  inviting  a  great  number  of  Indians 
of  the  territory  to  crofs  the  Milfifippi  ;  and  for  this  exprefs 
purpofe,  Mr.  Lorromie,  an  officer  in  the  pay  of  the  Crown, 
made  a  tour  through  all  this  country  laft  fall,  iince  which  time 
feveral  Indians  have  been  font  on  the  fame  errand,  and  gene- 
rally furnifhed  with  plenty  of  caih  to  defray  their  expeiices. 

"  A  large  party  of  Delaware*  patted  down  on  White  River 
about  the  6th  of  May,  on  their  way  to  the  Spanilh  fide,  bear- 
ing the  national  flag  of  Spain,  fome  of  them  from  Saint  Louis. 

"  They  (the  Spaniards)  have  above  the  mouth  of  the  Ohio, 
on  the  Miillfippi,  feveral  row-gallies  with  cannon." 

Now,  Sir,  what  inference  can  be  drawn  from  that  letter  ? 
Why,  that  the  Spaniards  have  fortified  San  Luis,  and  availed 
themfelves  of  every  means  of  defence  that  the  country  afforded! 
But  let  me  afk  you,  Sir,  againft  whom  it  is  that  they  were 
thus  preparing  to  defend  themfelves  ?  Surelv  the  documents 
which  you  have  laid  before  the  Prefident,  and  the  momentous 
bufmefs  which  now  engages  the  attention  of  Congrefs,  and 
agitates  the  public  at  large,  afford  a  complete  and  fatisfa&ory 
anfwer. 

I  mention  to  you,  in  my  letter  of  2d  March,  that  the  object 
of  the  Britifh  was  to  attack  Upper  Louifiana,  and  take  San 
Luis  and  New  Madrid  by  furprize.  It  will  not  be  queflioned 
but  that  prudence  required  of  us,  at  that  juncture,  to  fortify 
the  threatened  points.  This,  Sir,  was  all  we  did;  and  this, 
Sir,  you  knew  many  months  paft ;  yet  Mr.  Sargent's  letter, 
which  in  fubftance  fays  no  more,  fills  you  all  at  once  with 
fears  and  feif-created  apprehenfions,  and  makes  you  declare  in 
the  face  of  the  American  people,  "  that  the  Spanifh  Officers 
are  exciting  the  Indians  to  a  rupture  with  us."  No  one  will 
fay,  that  preparations  for  our  felf-defence  were  not  necelThry 
on  our  part.  The  aifurance  given  you  by  the  Britifh  Minifter, 
with  all  the  appearance  of  a  confidential  commuuication,  but 
without  any  fignature,  did  not  infpire  the  feryants  of  his  Catho- 
lic Majeity  with  the  fame  blind  confidence  which  it  produced 
in  you.  We  know  from  daily  experience  how  religioufly  the 
Britifh  nation  obferves  the  rights  of  neutrality.  Witnefs  the 
American  failors  !  Witnefs  the  Republic  of  Genoa,  in  whofe 
port  they  attacked  and  made  prize  of  the  French  frigate  La 
Mod-ode,  as  me  lay  at  anchor  there.  Witnefs  the  inhabitants 
of  Trinidad,  when  the  Britifh,  though  then  in  amity  with 
them,  entered  their  capital,  with  drums  beating  and  colours 
Hying,  in  purfuit  of  a  few  French,  who  had  taken  refuge 
there.  Thefe  and  other  inftances  of  the  fort,  too  numerous  to 
be  recapitulated,  make  us  lefs  credulous  on  the  fcore  of  Great- 
Britain's  refpect  for  the  rights  of  neutrality  than  you  appear  to 
-have  been, 

F 


42. 

As  to  thofc  tender  confiderations  which  actuated  the  Britiilr 
Minifter  to  reject  the  plan  on  account  of  the  inhumanity  of 
calling  in  the  aid  of  the  Indians,  I  did  expect  that  fuch  vague, 
unauthenticated  declarations,  would  have  been  appreciated  as 
they  deferved  by  you,  Sir,  who  fought  in  the  glorious  caufe  of 
American  Independence,  who  witneiTed  the  humanity  of  their 
conduct  in  the  courfe  of  that  war,  and  who  cannot  be  ignorant 
of  what  has  happened  lince. 

Your  afcribing  hoftile  views  to  the  preparations  for  our  felf- 
defence,  .cannot,  Sir,  have  been  matter  of  much  furprize  to 
me,  after  having  heard  a  certain  Member  of  Congrefs,  who  is 
known  to  be  the  organ  of  the  will  of  adminiftration,  declare 
in  that  Houfe  that  he  afcribed  to  the  fame  motives  the  prepa- 
rations we  were  making  for  the  defence  of  Florida,  though 
probably  he  was  not  ignorant,  at  the  very  time,  of  their  real 
objecl:.  Thus  then,  Sir,  according  to  your  mode  of  reafoning, 
and  that  of  the  Gentleman  I  have  juft  alluded  to,  though  we 
were  certain  of  being  attacked,  and  though  we  were  not  cer- 
tain that  the  American  Government  had  taken  the  proper  mea- 
fures  for  protecting  its  neutrality,  yet  we  were  to  adopt  no 
meafures  for  our  defence,  but  tamely  fuffer  his  Majefty's  forts 
and  pofFeffions  to  be  taken,  and  all  this  for  fear  of  creating  ill- 
founded  fufpicions  in  your  minds ! 

If  you  have  not  been  very  fuccefsful,  Sir,  in  the  folidity  of 
your  reafonings,  you  appear  not  to  be  more  fo  in  the  method 
of  following  them.  After  having  denounced  us  to  the  whole 
American  nation  as  ftirring  up  the  Indians  againft  the  United 
States,  and  preparing  them  for  a  rupture,  you  fall  into  the  moft 
glaring  inconfiftency  in  the  following  paragraph  : — Whether 
this  plan  of  exciting  the  Indians  to  direfl  hoftilities  againji  the  United 
States,  has  been  contemplated  and  promoted  by  any  of  our  own  Citi- 
zens, it  may  be  difficult  to  fay  ;  but  that  one  or  more  of  thofe  Citizens 
have  propped  and  taken  meafures  to  detach  the  Southern  Indians  from 
the  inter ejh  of  the  United  States,  and  to  deftroy  the  influence  of  the  pub- 
lic Agents  over  thofe  nations,  and  thus  to  defeat  the  great  objects  of  their 
appointment,  the  chief  of  which  is  to  preferve  peace,  is  certain. 

I  again  appeal  here,  Sir,  to  your  generous  candor.  How 
is  it  pofTible  to  reconcile  fuch  evident  contradictions  ?  On  the 
one  hand  the  Spanim  Officers  are  thofe  who  excite  the  Southern 
Indians  againft  the  United  States,  and  on  the  other  you  quickly 
follow  prefuming,  with  fufficient  foundation  in  my  opinion, 
that  it  may  be  fome  Citizens  of  the  United  States.  But  al- 
though you  might  entertain  any  doubts  yourfelf  on  the  fubjecT:, 
which  I  am  fure  no  perfon  in  America  will  after  reading  Mr. 
Blount's  letter,  did  not  this  very  fame  doubtful  cafe  and  uncer- 
tainty, require  in  your  fituation  more  circumfpeft  language  ? 


43- 

And  if  even  in  this  cafe  you  appear  to  have  gone  beyond  what 
found  policy,  the  tranquility  and  intereft  of  the  United  States 
required,  how  much  more  unjuit  are  your  infmuations  againft 
Spain,  when  the  public  poffefs,  in  Mr.  Bloimt's  letter,  a  do- 
cument by  which  they  can  fee,  that  if  the  manoeuvres  with  the 
Indians  were  not  favourable  to  the  United  States,  they  were 
precifely  combined  to  attack  the  Spaniards?  From  this  me- 
thod of  reafoning  of  yours,  it  appears  as  if  the  Spaniards  were, 
jointly  with  Mr.  Blount,  ftirring  up  the  Indians  to  attack 
them!  elves. 

Refpecting  the  laft  article  of  your  Report,  I  have  only  to  ob- 
ferve,  that  although  you  have  constantly  allured  me  that  Go- 
vernment had  not  the  leaft  information  refpecling  the  fubjecl: 
of  my  reprefentations,  and  although  the  letter  of  Mr.  Jackfon, 
of  Georgia,  appears  to  coincide  with  your  ideas,  neverthelcfs 
time  has  fhewn  that  I  have  complied  with  my  duty  by  not  re- 
pofing  on  fuch  aflurances.  The  plot  is  discovered,  and  no- 
body any  longer  doubts  that  the  expedition  was  to  have  taken 
place. 

After  having  followed  you  ftep  by  ftep  through  the  various 
points  of  your  Report  to  the  Prefident,  I  iTiall  make  a  fhort  com- 
pendium of  fuch  as  arife  from  this  letter ;  from  which  it  re- 
fults, 

1.  That  on  the  27th  of  February,  I  gave  you  fufficient  par- 
ticulars refpeding  the  intended  expedition,  to  have  attracted 
the  attention  of  this  Government. 

2.  That  although  to  this  verbal  communication,   I   added 
another  in  writing  on  the  ad  of  March,  the  Prefident  had  not 
the  leaft  knowledge  of  it  on  the  Qth  of  the  fame  month,  and 
that  without  doubt  you  muft  have  had  very  powerful  motives  to 
prevent  you  from  communicating  it  to  him. 

3.  That  it  does  not  appear  by  the  documents  prefented  by 
the  Secretary  of  War,  that  Government  had  given  orders  to 
the  military  Commanders  to  caufe  the  territory  and  neutrality 
of  the  United  States  to  be  refpe&ed. 

4.  That  you  made  to  the  Englifh  Minifter,  a  communica- 
tion, which  in  my  opinion  you  ought  not,  and  that  even  if  you 
thought  it  neceffary^  you  delayed  doing  it  for  two  months,  that 
is,  from  the  2yth  of  February  to  the  28th  of  April,  although  it 
refpecled  a  mod  urgent  and  important  object. 

5.  That  the  Baron  de  Carondelet  could  very  well  have  re- 
ceived my  letter,  without  its  neceffarily  following  that  his  had 
come  to  hand. 

6.  That  the  Baron  did  not  reprefent  Mr.  Ellicott's  not  writ- 
ing to  him  officially  as  a  complaint,  but  as  an  obj'ervatlony  and 
that  in  facl  he  never  has  done  it  in  thofe  terms. 


44- 

7-  That  the  proofs  you  allege  to  exculpate  Mr.  Ellicott, 
refpecting  his  intentions  of  taking  the  Fort  of  Natchez  by  fur- 
prize,  are  purely  negative. 

8.  That  it  is  not  merely  pretences,  but  very  powerful  rea- 
fons,  which  have  impeded  the  evacuation  of  the  Polls,  and  the 
running  of  the  Boundary  Line. 

9.  That  the  infmuations  with  which  you  are  willing  to  per- 
fuade  the  American  People  that  our  arming  is  directed  againfl 
them,  are  unjufl  as  well  as  unfounded,  as   by  Mr.  Blount's 
letter  it  is  clearly  demonftrated  to  be  a  precaution  for  the  mere 
purpofe  of  defence. 

10.  That 'you   evidently  contradict  yourfelf,  when  on  one 
hand  you  are  pleafed  to  attribute  to  us  the  movements  of  the 
Indians,  and  in  the  very  next  paragraph  you  fhew  it  might 
proceed  from  American  citizens,  as  it  actually  does  according 
to  Mr.  Blount's  letter  ;  and  that  he  acted  with  the  knowledge 
and  intelligence  of  the  very  fame  Britifh  Minifler,  in  whofe 
Private  Notes,  without  Jignature,  and  perhaps  not  of  his  own  hand 
writing,  you  place  fuch  implicit  confidence. 

11.  That  although  in  all  your  official  communications,  you 
have  always  manifefled  to  me  that  the  American  Government 
knew  of  nothing  which  indicated  any  foundation  for  my  fuf- 
picions,  Mr.  Blount's  letter  clearly  proves  that  I  was  perfectly 
in  the  right. 

I  have  thus  fulfilled  a  very  difagreeable  duty.  Always  de- 
firous  to  contribute  to  ftrengthen  the  bauds  of  friendfhip  which 
unite  Spain  and  America,  and  to  which  their  fituation,  their 
wants  and  refources,  invite  them,  I  have  fecn  with  the  mofl  pro- 
found grief,  that  the  language  and  tenor  of  your  communication 
to  the  Preftdcnt,  is  not,  in  my  opinion,  calculated  to  promote 
fo  defirable  an  object  to  us  all.  For  my  part,  although  I  (hall 
leave  nothing  undone,  to  cement  the  union  and  harmony  with 
a  Nation  which  I  refpect ;  neither  mail  I  ever  fuffer  the  in- 
terefls  of  the  King,  my  Mailer,  in  any  cafe  whatever,  to  be 
facrificed  to  an  unjufl  partiality. 

I  pray  God  to  preferve  you  many  years. 

Tour  moft  obedient  humble  fervant, 
CARLOS  MARTINEZ  DE  YRUJO. 
Philadelphia,  July  n,  1797. 


45' 


(No.  13.) 

Mr.  Pickering,  Secretary  of  State,  to  the  Chevalier  de  ?>///*,  En- 
voy Extraordinary  and  Minifter  Plenipotentiary  of  His  Catholic 
Majefty,  to  the  United  States  of  America. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  STATE, 

Philadelphia,  Auguji  %tb,   1797. 
S  I  R, 

I  DULY  received  your  letter  of  the  nth  of  the  laft  month, 
to  which  my  other  engagements  have  till  this  time  prevented 
an  anfwer. 

My  additional  Report  to  the  Prefklent  of  the  United  States, 
on  the  3d  of  July,  in  relation  to  Spanifh  affairs  has  offended, 
you,  and  is  mentioned  as  the  caufe  of  your  .writing  to  me  on 
the  nth.  If,  Sir,  I  were  now  to  make  the  juft  remarks  and 
recriminations  which  your  letter  obvioufly  fuggefts,  I  am 
afraid  you  would  be  ftill  more  offended.  I  am  not  fure,  indeed, 
that  I  can  poflibly  frame  an  anfwer  that  will  efcape  your  dif- 
pleafure  :  but  I  fhall  endeavour  that  it  be  exprerTed  not  in  a 
Kyle  indecorous,  unufual,  and  unbecoming  a  diplomatic  corre- 
fpondence,  while  it  contains  a  fair  expofition  of  facts  and  ar- 
guments, in  oppofition  to  errors  and  actual  mifreprefentations. 

In  refpedt  to  your  fufpicions  of  an  expedition  preparing  on 
the  lakes  by  the  Britifh,  for  an  attack  upon  upper  Louifiana, 
I  have  faid  that  you  never  mentioned  a  fingle  tact  or  reafon 
on  which  your  fufpicions  were  founded.  In  contradiction  to 
this  aiTertion,  you  fay  that  "  In  our  conference,  on  the  2"th 
of  February,  you  gave  me  information  that  a  corps  of  3^0 
men  had  been  raifed  at  Montreal  and  marched  towards  the 
lakes,  where,  after  the  evacuation  of  the  American  ports, 
there  was  no  oftenfible  object  for  them  :" — "  That  you  knew 
that  the  Britifh  agents  had  treated  with  fome  of  the  Indian  na- 
tions in  that  country,  concerning  the  intended  expedition ; 
and  that  you  added,  that  you  had  received  thofe  advices  from 
a  perfon  who  might  be  depended  on,  who  had  feen  thefe  new 
levies  palling  through  Johnftown,  on  their  way  to  the  weft- 
ward."  To  this,  Sir,  I  anfwer,  That  I  have  not  the  flighted 
recollection  that  you  mentioned  either  of  thefe  circumstances  ; 
— that  the  Secretary  of  War  happened  to  come  into  my  office 
while  we  were  converfing, — at  which  you  expreiTed  your  fatis- 
faction,  and  repeated  your  fufpicions, — and  he  fays  you  then 
mentioned  no  fact  or  reafon  as  the  ground  thereof  ;  and  that 
when  I  mentioned  the  fubject  to  the  Prefident,  certainly  within 
•fcn  or  twelve  days  after  this  conference,  I  perfectly  remember 


making  to  him  this  remark — That  in  your  letter  of  March  ad, 
you  faid  you  had  three  days  bfore  declared  to  me  the^'w/?  reafons 
you  had  for  fupe&ing  that  the  Englifh  were  preparing  the  expe- 
dition in  queftion  ;  whereas  you  had  offered  me  no  reafon  at  all. 
Hence  I  am  obliged  to  conclude  that  you  might  have  held  fuch 
'a  convcrfation  with  fome  other  perfon,  and  by  miftake  have 
applied  it  to  me.  The  Englifh  raifmg  350  men — marching 
them  through  Johnftown — and  tampering  with  the  Indians  to 
promote  the  expedition — were  circumftances  which  appeared 
perfectly  new  to  me  when  I  received  your  letter  of  the  nth 
inftant.  I  remember  alfo,  that  the  conference  ended  by  your 
faying  you  would  write  to  me  on  the  fubjefl  ;  which  evidently  im- 
plied that  your  written  reprefentation  was  to  be  the  bafis  of 
any  act  of  mine,  or  of  the  government.  In  that  letter,  Sir,  if 
you  poffeffed  any  grounds  for  your  fufpicions,  you  ought  to 
have  ftated  them.  For,  contrary  to  the  opinion  you  have  now 
exprelTed,  I  have  no  hefitation  in  faying  that  the  government 
of  the  United  States  was  not  bound  to  talte  notice  of  the  vague 
and  unfupported  fufpicions  of  any  minifter  ;  at  leaft  not  to  in- 
cur expenie,  by  its  military  arrangements,  to  prevent  an  ima- 
ginary expedition,  fuch  as  was  the  object  of  yours.  When 
you  made  a  formal  ftatement  of  your  fufpicions,  but  without 
any  fact  to  mew  that  they  were  founded ;  when  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  pofTeired  no  other  information  nor  the 
knowledge  of  any  circumftances  indicative  of  the  expedition  ;' 
and  when  in  itfelf  it  appeared  deftitute  of  even  the  fhadow  of 
probability ;  it  was  an  act  of  complaifance  to  aflure  you  that  it 
u  would  be  anxious  to  maintain  the  rights  of  their  neutral  fitu- 
ation,  and  on  all  occafions  adopt  and  purfue  thofe  meafures 
which  fliould  appear  proper  and  expedient  for  that  end." 
What  thefe  meafures  fliould  be,  and  when  to  be  .taken,  thd 
government  itfelf  would  judge. 

It  was  an  act  of  ftill  greater  complaifance,  when  on  the  2ift 
of  April  you  renewed  the  declaration  of  your  fufpicions,  but 
Jl'tll  without  aligning  any  reafons,  for  the  government  to  refolve 
on,  and  to  communicate  to  you,  what  you  are  pleafed  to  allow 
to  be  a  "  determinate  difpofition  on  this  point." 

In  the  next  fentence  (as  in  many  others)  you  mifreprefent 
my  expreflions  and  mifunderftand  my  meaning.  I  do  not  fay, 
that  "  from  your  not  having  given  me  detailed  information  re-l 
fpectingthe  expedition,  and  from  the  anfwer  which  I  received! 
from  the  Britifh  minifter  on  the  i9th  of  June,  I  believed  the] 
expedition  to  be  groundlefs  :"  But  after  remarking  that  yoi^ 
never  mentioned  a  fingle  fact  or  reafon  to  fupport  your  fufpi-; 
cions — I  fay,  "  From  all  the  exijlmg  circumjtances  I  ever  believ- 
ed the  fufpicion  to  be  groundlefs."  If  proofs  hadexifted,  ycvf 


47- 

would  have  produced  them  :  For  although  intrigues  and  confpl- 
racies  for  the  purpofe  of  a  military  expedition  may  long  be 
concealed  ;  yet  the  preparations  for  an  expedition  (and  fuch  you 
fuggefted  were  making)  mufl  be  vifible  to  many  ;  efpecially 
'*  on  the  lakes,"  where  every  movement  for  fuch  a  defign  would 
be  unufual,  and  therefore  attract  the  more  attention  ;  and  fa- 
tisfactory  proofs  of  fuch  preparations  would  have  been  attaina- 
ble :  but  you  produced  none. 

Another  material  circmnftance  I  muft  notice — That  troops 
of  the  United  'States  were  ftationed  at  Niagara,  on  the  Miami, 
at  Detroit,  and  Michilimackinack  ;  and  confequently  in  fitu- 
ations  well  calculated  to  protect  our  territory,  as  well  as  to 
difcover  or  get  information  of,  any  warlike  preparations  fo 
coniiderable  as  fuch  an  expedition  would  require  ;  and  the  of- 
ficers commanding  on  thofe  ftations  could  not  have  failed  to 
communicate  fuch  difcoveries  or  information  tq  the  Depart- 
ment of  War  :  Yet  no  fuch  communications  were  made. 

But  it  was  alfo  well  known  that  they  had  not  on  the  lakes  a 
force  adequate  to  the  interprize  in  queftion.  I  confidered  alfo 
the  great  difficulties  that  would  attend  the  tranfportation  of 
troops,  equipage,  provifions,  cannon,  and  ftores,  by  either  of 
the  routes  fuggefted — if  either  could  have  been  taken  with- 
out violating  the  territory  of  the  United  States. 

Thefe  were  circumftances  abundantly  fufficient  to  difcredit 
naked  fufpicions  ;  and  the  declaration  of  Mr.  Lifton,  in  his  note 
of  the  1 9th  of  June,  was  mentioned  only  as  confirming  the 
juftnefs  of  the  opinion  which  I  had  at  firft  formed  in  March, 
and  which  I  continued  to  entertain  of  your  fufpicions.  I  might 
add,  that  at  that  early  period,  Mr.  Liiton  airured  me  that  he 
had  no  knowledge  of  fuch  an  expedition  ;  and  his  inquiries  of 
the  Governor-general  of  Canada  and  the  Britilh  Secretary  of 
State,  have  enabled  him  pofitively  to  allert,  in  the  above  note, 
that  no  fuch  expedition  was  ever  intended.  And  this  fact  re- 
pels your  fuggeftions  that  I  had  been  "  remifs"  in  not  doing 
for  two  months,  what,  on  my  own  principles,  was  proper  to 
hav  (•  been  done.  But  you  think  I  ought  not  to  have  communi- 
cated your  fufpicions  of  this  expedition  to  the  Britiih  minifter, 
although  "  his  motions  were  to  be  watched."  You  think,  on 
the  contrary,  that  the  Prefident  fhould  "  have  given  fuitaWc 
orders  to  General  Wilkinfon,  or  to  the  commanding  officer -of 
the  military  force  on  thofe  frontiers;"  but  have  kept  a  perfect 
filence  towards  the  Britilh — have  let  them  complete  their  pre- 
parations (if  any  had  been  making)  and  collect  their  army  on 
the  lakes — have  let  them  move  forward,  until  they  mould  enter 
upon  the  territory  of  the  United  States  :  snd  feeing  the  Prefi- 
•^ent  could  not  know  beforehand,  whether  they  would  profe- 


48. 

cute  their  march  by  "  Fox  River  and  Ouifconfin,  or  the  .Illinois,'* 
we  may  fuppofe  your  ideas  of  the  "  fiiitable  orders''  to  the  mi- 
litary to  be — that  at  a  great  expenfe  the  troops  of  the  United 
States  mould  be  drawn  into  that  country  and  divided  into  corps, 
to  be  polled  on  thofe  rivers,  to  have  fought  the  Britifh  army, 
and  thus  have  defeated  the  enterprize.  Sir,  this  is  not  the  only 
inftance  in  which,  after  having  defired  the  American  govern- 
ment to  do  fome  aft  interetting  to  your  own,  you  have  then 
prefumed  to  dictate  how  it  fhould  be  done. 

"  But  (you  fay)  you  never  could  have  imagined,  that  I  would 
have  given  to  the  Britifh  minifter  a  piece  of  advice,  which 
might  enable  him  to  alter  his  plan,  by  letting  him  know  that 
the  former  one  was  difcovered."  And  what,  Sir,  was  the  plan 
of  the  Britifh  to  defeat  which  you  defired  the  American  go- 
vernment to  interfere  ?  Why,  according  to  your  fufpic ions,  it 
was  to  march  an  army  through  the  territory  of  the  United  States 
again ft '  Upper  Loui/iana.  If  then  the  communication  of  your 
fufpicions  to  Mr.  Litton  would  induce  him  to  "  alter  his 
plan" — it  would  by  a  word  or  a  letter,  inftead  of  an  army,  defeat 
the  expedition  ;  for  it  was  not  poilible  it  mould  go  forward 
except  through  the  territory  of  the  United  States  ;  and  confequently 
the  communication,  inftead  of  disappointing,  would  have  per- 
fectly accompli/lied  what  you  requeued. 

In  your  5th  paragraph,  you  are  pleafed  to  mention  what  you 
confider  as  another  omifTion  of  duty,  That  although  on  the  sd 
of  March  you  wrote  your  fufpicions,  and  three  days  before  you 
mentioned  them  verbally,  yet  on  the  gth,  I  had  not  laid  the 
matter  before  the  Prefident.  I  will  take  the  trouble  to  mow 
with  how  little  reafon  you  have  made  this  remark.  The  fe- 
cond  of  March  was  the  day  next  preceding  the  diflblution  of 
Congrcfs  ;  and  at  the  clofe  of  a  fefilqri  the  Prefident  is  over- 
whelmed with  bufmefs  that  cannot  be  poftponed.  On  the  third 
the  then  Prefident's  term  of  office  expired.  On  the  4th  the 
inauguration  of  the  fucceeding  Prefident  was  celebrated.  The 
5th  of  March  was  Sunday.  The  five  following  days  were  not 
unoccupied  ;  and  on  the  eleventh  of  March  the  anfwer  to  your 
letter  of  the  2d  was  given.  And  although  you  attach  much 
importance  to  your  fufpicions,  the  details  I  have  given  prove 
that  they  were  then  dettitute  of  probability, — that  they  were 
in  fa6t  unfounded  ;  and  confequently  of  no  importance  ;  that 
as  fuch  I  then  juftly  confidered  them  ;  and  therefore  needed 
no  "  very  powerful"  motives  to  remain  filent  fve  days. 

I  cannot  but  regret  that  my  reafoning  is  fo  often  not  under- 
flood.  When  reciting  my  inquiry  whether  the  potts  occupied 
by  the  troops  of  Spain  within  the  territory  of  the  United  States, 
had  been  evacuated  ;  and  your  anfwer,  that  not  having  for  fomc . 


49- 

months  heard  from  die  Baron  de  Carondelet,  you  "  were  deprived 
of  any  information  touching  the  fteps  taken  for  the  execution 
of  the  treaty." — I  put  thefe  lafl  words  between  inverted  commas,, 
not  as  you  fay,  "  in  order  to  draw  attention" — but  becaufe  they 
were  an  exadl  quotation  from  the  tranflation  of  your  letter.  And 
when  I  added,  in  my  report,  "  nevcrthelefs  he  (the  minifter 
of  his  Catholic  Majefty)  had  previoufly  informed  the  Baron  de 
Carondelet  of  his  fufpicions  of  a  projected  expedition  from 
Canada  ;"  it  was  not  to  prove  either  that  the  Baron  had  received 
your  letters,  or  that  you  had  received  his  :  but  as  that  very  in- 
formation was  afligned  by  the  Baron  as  a  reafon  for  ftill  retain- 
ing  and  reinforcing  the  pods,  the  obvious  conclufion  was  that 
you  wrote  and  transmitted  to  him  the  information  with  that 
view  :  and  hence,  that  inftead  of  difclaiming  all  knowledge  on 
the  fubjecl,  candour  ihould  have  induced  you  to  anfwer  me,  That 
although  you  had  not  received  any  late  letters  from  the  Baron, 
and  therefore  you  could  not  fay  what  fteps  had  actually  been 
taken  for  the  evacuation  of  the  ports,  yet  that  on  account  of  the 
fufpected  expedition  from  the  Lakes,  of  which  you  had  informed 
the  Baron,  you  prefumed  for  you  advifed,  and  probably  you  did 
advife)  that  he  would  ftill  hold  pollefTion  of  them  "to  cover 
Louifiana."  This  "  logic,"  Sir,  I  hope  is  intelligible  ;  and  at 
any  rate,  not  "  extremely  falfe." 

I  cannot  omit  noticing  your  obfervations  on  the  5th  para- 
graph of  my  report.  If,  as  you  were  obliging  enough  to  pro- 
ruife,  you  had  favoured  me  with  copies  of  the  Baron  dc  Caron- 
delet's  two  letters  (of  which  you  undertook  to  give  me  an  oral 
but  literal  tranflation)  inftead  of  their  "  fubftance,"  I  might 
have  been  more  corre6t  in  reciting  his  affertion — That  Mr. 
Ellicott  had  not  given  him  notice  of  his  arrival  at  the  Natchez 
as  the  Commiffioner  of  the  United  States  for  running  the  boun- 
dary line.  Whether  this  was  a  complaint ,  or  an  "  okfervation" 
as  you  choofe  to  call  it,  every  reader  of  your  letter  will  fee  to 
be  of  no  confequence.  But  whether  the  aflertion  was  founded 
or  unfounded,  was  material ;  feeing,  in  the  fame  letter,  Mr. 
Ellicott  is  charged  with  having  "  carried  his  zeal  fo  far  as  to 
attempt  to  get  poiretfion  of  the  fort  of  the  Natchez  by  fur- 
prize  ;"  and  an  affertion  fallows,  that  "  Governor  Gayofo  fays 
he  has  in  his  power  documents  which  prove  evidently  the  inten- 
tion of  this  attempt."  This  accufation  againft  Mr.  Eljicott  I 
confidered  as  injurious,  not  to  him  only  but  to  the  government ; 
for  which  in  the  character  of  commiffioner  he  was  appointed  to 
acl:.  If  other  circumftances  induced  me  to  doubt  its  correcT:- 
nefs,  the  other  complaint  or  tf  obfcrvation,"  which  I  knew  to 
be  unfounded,  could  not  but  increafe  my  doubts.  It  was  jm- 

G 


5o. 

portant,  therefore,'  and  my  duy,  to  prefent  them  together  to 
the  Present's  notice.  I  have  not  "  entirely  miftaken"  this 
matter.  In  my  report  to  the  Prefident,  I  did  not  undertake  to 
recite  what  you  "mentioned,"  but  what  you  tranjlated  from 
the  Baron  de  Carondelet's  letters  :  you  repeated  the  charge  in 
qucftion  ;  and  it  was  not  till  then  that  I  handed  ycu  the  copies 
of  the  Baron's  and  Mr.  Ellicott's  correfpondence  fhewing  the  re- 
pugnance of  fact  to  affertion  ;  and  it  was  then  that  you  blufhed  ; 
as  I  had  before  been  aftonifhed.  And  your  remark,  afterwards, 
was  what  I  have  itated  in  my  report,  "  That  you  fuppofed  the 
Baron  did  not  confider  Mr.  Ellicott's  letter  as  official."  You 
then  made  no  diftinction  between  a  complaint  and  an  t(  obferva- 
fion,"  nor  ufed  the  phrafe  "  in  the  rigour,"  nor  any  other 
qualifying  words  ;  except  thofe  which  are  flated  in  my  report. 

Eefides,  the  Baron  had  no  right  to  expect  any  other  evidence 
of  Mr.  Ellicott's  appointment  than  his  letter,  until  they  mould 
meet  for  the  purpofe  of  commencing  the  bufmefs  of  their  ap- 
pointments ;  when  of  coui  fe  they  would  mutually  exhibit  their 
commiffions.  And  from  the  Baron's  anfwer  of  the  ift  of 
March,  it  is  plain  that  he  expected  no  other  notice  :  for  he 
therein  recognizes  Mr.  Ellicott  as  the  commiflioner  of  the 
United  States. 

In  the  laft  fentence.of  your  paragraph  on  this  fubject  you 
fay,  "  That  when  after  a  mixed  and  defultory  converfation  up- 
on various  fubjects,  you  had  collected  and  methodized  your 
Ideas,  and  committed  them  to  writing,  my  anfwer  and  obferva- 
tions  ought  to  have  been  confined  to  the  written  communica- 
tion." This  obfervation,  Sir,  is  inaccurate. 

It  may,  however,  be  applied  to  a  former  part  of  your  letter. 
You  fay  that  in  our  conference  on  the  2yth  of  February,  you 
mentioned  to  me  the  raifing  of  350  men  at  Montreal — that  your 
informer  faw  them  pafs  through  Johnftown — and  that  you 
knew  the  Britiih  agents  had  treated  with  fome  of  the  Indian 
nations  concerning  an  expedition  preparing  on  the  lakes.  But 
in  your  letter  of  the  2d  of  March,  in  which  you  were  "  to  col- 
lect and  methodize  your  ideas"  oh  the  fubject  of  your  fufpi- 
cions,  you  do  not  introduce  one  of  thofe  fufpicions  :  of  courfe, 
on  your  own  principles,  I  ought,  if  they  ever  had  been  men- 
tioned, to  have  considered  them  as  nullities. 

In  the  8th  paragraph  of  your  letter,  you  obferve  that  my 
proof  obtained  from  Mr.  Ellicott's  mefiengers,  that  he  did  not 
attempt  to  get  pofTeirion  of  the  Natchez  fort  by  furprize,  is 
merely  negative.  I  offered  it  only  as  fuch.  But  the  negative 
teftimony  of  two  men  of  good  characters  againft  a  fact  which 
they  were  likely  to  be  acquainted  with,  if  it  exifted,  and 
jwhofe  existence  other  circumftarices  rendered  improbable,  and 


fi1- 

the  afieriion  of  which  is  mingled  wtih  aflcrtion.?,  by  the  fame 
perfon,  of  other  fa6ts,  of  which  fome,  or  even  one,  is  known* 
to  be  unfounded,  merits  confideration.  There  is,  however, 
further  evidence  applicable  to  this  cafe.  In  the  letter  dated  at 
the  Natchez  the  5th  of  May,  from  Lieutenant  Pope  to  Gover- 
nor Gayofo,  you  will  fee  that  the  governor  had  made  the  like 
accufation  againft  the  lieutenant.  "  A  gentleman  had  inform- 
ed him  (the  governor)  that  the  lieutenant  intended  to  attack 
the  garrifon  at  that  place.'5  Lieutenant  Pope,  juitly  hurt  by 
the  groundlefs  affertion,  dcfircs  the  informer  may  be  named, 
and  required  to  acquit  himfelf  of  his  alfertion,  or  be  punifhcd 
as  a  falfe  accufer.  '  The  governor  anfvvers  the  next  day,-— fpeaks 
of  the  information  as  communicated  to  Lieutenant  Pope  in 
familiar  cwverfation  ;  and  adds,  that  the  informer  was  to  be 
dejpljed.  Yet  from  the  pointed-  manner  in  which  Lieutenant 
Pope  made  the  demand,  it  is  evident  that  the  information  was 
prefented  to  him  as  a  ferious  accufation.  After 'this  detail, 
will  it  not  be  conjectured,  that  the  governor's  "  documents" 
refpedling  Mr.  Ellicott's  "  attempt"  are  of  a  piece  with  his 
"  famijiar  converfation"  with  Lieutenant  Pope  concerning  his 
"  intended  attack  ?" 

In  the  Qth  paragraph  of  your  letter,  you  fay  that  "  after 
having  difcufied  the  hiftory  of  thefe  tranfadlions,  with  all  tiic 
force  and  accuracy  which  refult  from  thefe  obfervations,  I  af- 
fure,  with  a  very  ill-grounded  confidence,  that  upon  a  view  of 
the  whole  it  appears,  that  his  majefty's  governors  on  the 
Miflifippi  have  on  various  pretences,  psftponed  the  running  of 
the  boundary  line  and  the  evacuation  of  the  pofts."  I  mull 
here  alfo  complain  of  mifreprefentation.  I  did  not'  in  my  re- 
port draw  my  conclulions  from  the  hiflory  of  tbcfe  tranuicli- 
ons — that  is,  of  the  tranfa&ions  which  you  have  previoujly^  men- 
tioned in  your  letter,  and  which  I  have  already  noticed  in  this 
anfwer:  but  "  Upon  a  view  of  the  whole  corrcfpondence  then 
and  before  fubmitted  to  the  Prefident."  This  correfpondence 
I  will  now  examine,  to  fee  whether  the  caufes  afligned  by  the 
Spanifh  governors,  for  poftponing  the  running  of  the  boundary 
line  and  evacuating  the  pofts,  merit  the  name  of  reaf<msy  or  of 
pretences. 

Governor  Gayofo  being  informed  of  Mr.  Ellicott's  defcend- 
ing  the  Miflifippi,  wrote  to  him  on  the  I  yth  of  February,  de- 
firing  him  to  leave  his  efcort  at  Bay  on  Pierre,  60  miles  above 
the  Natchez.  Yet  the  treaty  prefcribed  a  military  efcort  on 
each  fide  to  attend  the  commiffioners  in  running  the  boundary 
line  ;  and  the  Natchez  as  the  place  of  their  firft  meeting.  The 
chief  reafon  offered  for  this  requeft  was,  that  if  the  troops  of 
the  two  Cations  were  brought  together  "  mifunderfbndings'' 


might  arife  between  them.  '  Yet  the  treaty  required  their 
tmr  together  to  attend  the  commillioners  when  they-' were  jointly 
running  the  boundary  line. — And  the  only  reafon  the  governor 
ailigned  for  not  evacuating  the  ports,  Was  "  The  want  of  vef- 
fels,"  but  which  he  expected  would  foon  arrive. 

On  the  25th  of  February,  governor  Gayofo  and  Mr.  Elli- 
cott  fixed  <?n  the  iQth  of  March  to  proceed  down  the  river  to 
Clarkefville,  near  which  it  was  fuppofed  the  boundary  line 
would  commence. 

On  the  gth  of  March,  governor  Gayofo  informed  Mr.  Elli- 
cott  that  the  Baron  de  Carondelet  could  not  attend  the  running 
of  the  line,  in  perfon,  and  that  the  whole  bufmefs  had  devolv- 
ed on  him,  the  governor ;  but  he  feared  he  mould  not  be  ready 
by  the  I9th.  And  then  he  endeavoured  to  draw  Mr.  Ellicott 
from  his  proper  ftation  at  the  Natchez,  by  propofmg  a  vifit  to 
the  Baron  at  New-Orleans. 

March  1 2th,  the  governor  again  endeavoured  to  draw  Mr. 
Ellicottt  from  the  Natchez,  and  recommended  Loftus'  Cliffs 
near  Clarkefville  as  the  point  of  re-uniting:  and  by  way  of 
inducement,  faid  the  Geometer  and  other  officers  to  be  em- 
ployed on  the  boundary  line  would  flop  at  Clarkefville. 

On  the  1 5th  of  March,  the  principal  part  of  the  artillery 
was  taken  out  of  the  fort,  and  every  appearance  made  of  a 
fpeedy  evacuation :  but  on  the  22d  they  were  carried  back  to 
the  fort,  and  immediately  remounted.  A  fimilar  movement 
took  place  at  the  latter  end  of  April,  after  the  arrival  of  lieu- 
tenant Pope  and  his  troops  at  the  Natchez.  "  The  evacuation 
(fays  he)  appeared  to  be  going  on  with  great  life  ;  when  all  at 
once  the  military  ftores  were  ordered  back,  their  troops  bufily 
engaged  all  night  taking  back  and  remounting  the  cannon." 
Here  he  very  naturally  expreiTes  his  furprize — "  This  kind  of 
conduct  (fays  he)  appeared  and  (till  appears  ftrange." 

March  23d,  the  governor  mentions  that  orders  had  been 
given  by  the  general  in  chief  of  the  province  to  demolifh  the 
poft  at  the  Walnut  Hills — -becaufe  their  treaty  with  the  Indians 
required  it:  but  as  he  (Gayofo)  had  fince  been  informed  of  their 
unfettled  difpofitions,  he  had  fent  counter-orders,  to  prevent 
the  fortifications  being  injured ;  fuggefting  at  the  fame  time 
that  the  moving  of  the  ftores,  &c.  was  fufpended  only  until  the 
arrival  of  the  American  troops  to  take  pofifeflion  of  the  poft. 

In  this  letter  the  governor  informs  Mr.  Ellicott  that  lieute- 
nant colonel  Guillemard  was  far  on  his  way  up  ;  and,  on  his 
arrival,  the  running  of  the  boundary  line  fhould  begin.  The 
governor  adds  this  aflurance  "  That  there  is  nothing  that  can 
prevent  the  religious  compliance  with  the  Treaty." 


53- 

On  the  28th  and  29th  of  March,  governor  Gayofo  iiTucd 
two  proclamations,  both  bearing  date  the  29th,  taking  new 
ground  for  retaining  the  poft,  viz.  until  the  right  of  the 
inhabitants  to  the  real  property  is  afcertained.  The  governor 
is  pleafed  to  fay  that  a  negocia-tion  was  then  carrying  on  be- 
tween the  king  > of  Spain  and  the  United  States,  to  iecure  to 
the  inhabitants  of  the  Natchez  the  right  to  their  real  property: 
that  that  right  could  not  be  fecured  but  by  an  additional  article 
to  the  late  treaty ;  and  that  he  ihould  keep  poifeiTion  of  the 
country  until  that  article  ihould  be  officially  communicated  to 
him ;  and  until  they  were  fure  that  the  Indians  would  be  pacific. 
This  laft  reafon  particularly  warrants  niy  aflertion — That  the 
governors  meant  for  an  indefinite  period  to  avoid  an  evacuation 
of  the  ports — for  while  a  tribe  of  Indians  exifted  in  that  quar- 
ter, the  governors  could  not  be  Jure  that  they  would  be  pacific. 
And  as  to  their  real  property,  feeing  the  great  body  of  the  in- 
habitants appear  not  to  defire  the  patronage  of  the  Spanifh  go- 
vernment to  fecure  it :  As  the  government  of  the  United  States 
mr.il  be  at  lead  as  an,x'ious  as  that  of  Spain  to  protect  the  inha- 
bitants in  their  rights,  when  become  ciiizens  of  the  United 
States  :  I  believe  there  can  be  no  difficulty  in  deciding  whe- 
ther this  is  a  reafon  or  a  pretence.  Eefides,  the  negociation 
mentioned  by  the  governor  about  the  real  property  of  the  inhabi- 
tants^ has  never  exifted;  nor  even  been  -propofed  or  hinted, 
either  to  or  by  the  government  of  the  United  States.  I  hope, 
therefore,  it  will  not  be  deemed  harih,  or  unbecoming  in  a 
letter  of  this  kind,  to  fay,  that  this  motive  for  fufpending 
the  evacuation  of  the  pofts — that  a  negociation  was  then  on 
foot  to  fecure  the  real  property  of  the  inhabitants — does  not 
merit  the  title  even  of  a  pretence. 

So  foon  as  the  governor  discovered  that  his  proclamations, 
inftead  of  quieting  the  minds  of  the  inhabitants,  produced  a 
contrary  erFecl:,  he  fent  twro  gentlemen  of  the  fettlement  to 
inform  Mr.  Ellicott  that  he,  the  governor,  had  received  di- 
rections from  the  Baron  de  Carondelet  to  have  the  artillery 
and  military  ftores  expeditioufly  removed  from  the  forts,  which 
Were  to  be  given  up  to  the  troops  of  the  United  States  imme- 
diately on  their  arrival.  As  this  information  did  not  remove 
fufpicions,  Mr.  EHicott  wrote  the  governor  on  the  3ift  of 
March,  dating  divers  circumftances  which  (till  kept  thofe  fuf- 
picions  alive.  The  governor  anfwered  on  the  fame  day  in  di- 
rect contradiction  to  the  information  given  by  the  gentlemen, 
his  agents,  to  Mr.  EHicott,  and  confirming  the  declarations 
made  in  his  proclamations.  He  added  alfo  a  new  motive  for 
retaining  the  pofts,  viz.  That  the  treaty  left  it  doubtful 
'whether,  when  the  pofts  (hould  be  evacuated,  the  works  were 


51- 

to  be  left  Handing,  or.  to  be  demoiiflied ,  concerning  which 
the  governor  general  found  himfelf  obliged  to  confult  his  Ca- 
tholic Majefty  ;  and  had  given  the  governor  pofitive  orders  to 
fufpend  trie  evacuations  of  the  ports  until  the  matter  ihould  be 
amicably  fettled  between  the  two  governments. 

On  the  id  of  May,  another  motive  is  affigned  for  retaining 
the  pods — The  envoy  of  his  Catholic  Majefty  in  the  United 
States,  had  informed  the  governor  general  cf  an  attack  pro- 
pofed  againft  the  Spanifli  part  of  Illinois  (the  upper  part  of 
Louisiana)  by  the  British  from  Canada,  and,  therefore,  the 
pofts  at  the  Walnut  Hills  and  the  Natchez  muft  be  kept  for 
the  defence  of  lower  Louifiana. 

This  laft  motive  is  alio  offered  as  a  reafon  why  the  running 
of  the  boundary  line  is  poftporied ;  as  ail  their  attention  was 
drawn  towards  the  defence  of  the  province-,  againft  an  iuva- 
iion  which,  a$  I  have  already  mown,  was  never  contemplated. 

To  all  thefe  facts,  I.lsave  to  add  the  declaration  of  Ge- 
neral Wilkinfon,  in  his  letter  of  June  2d,  to  the  Secretary  of 
War — "  I  have  (fays  he)  information  through  a  confidential 
channel,  that  it  was  determined  as  early  as  September  loft,  not 
to  give  up  the  pofts  on  the  MiHifippi."  If  this  information 
be  correct,  no  other  proof  is  neceifary  to  mew  that  all  the  rea^ 
fons  from  time  to. time  fuggefted  for  not  evacuating  the  pofts 
were  mere  pretences.. 

I  have  here  brought  into  one  view  the  moft  material  facts 
relating  to  the  queftion  between  us,  *  which  are  fcattered 
throughout  the  reports  made  by  me  to  the  Prefident  of  the 
United  States  on  the  loth  of  Jiine  and  3d  of  July,  and  by  the 
Secretary  of  War  on  the  3oth  of  June,  and  the  documents  ac- 
companying them,  as  they  have  been  published.  And  from 
this  brief  recital  it  evidently  appears,  as  I  have  faid  in  my  re- 
port "  That  the  governors  of  his  Catholic  Majefty,  on  the 
Miflifippi,  have,  on  various  pretences,  poftponed  the  running 
of  the  boundary  line,  and  the  withdrawing  of  his  troops  from 
the  pofts  they  occupied  within  the  territory  of  the  United 
States :  And  that  after  repeated  overtures,  promifes,  and 
appearances  of  commencing  the  execution  of  the  treaty  be- 
tween the  two  nations,  in  both  thefe  refpects,  their  conduct 
demonftrates,  that  for  an  indefinite  period  they  meant  to  avoid 
doing  either/' 

You  controvert  this  conclufion  only  on  one  ground.  You 
fay  that  the  Treaty  ftipulated  merely  that  the  Spanifh  garnfons 
mould  be  withdrawn,  not  that  fortifications  which  might  one  day 
be  prejudicial  to  the  king's  fubjects,  mould  be  delivered  up  :  and 
hence  you  infer  that  the  neceiiity  urged  by  the  two  governors 
of  delaying  to  withdraw  the  gar-rifons  until  this  queftion' is  de- 


55- 

cided  between  the  two  governments,  is  not  a  pretence ,  but  a 
fubftantial  reafon.  Here  I  mufl  pbferve  that  the  governors, 
had  already  demoliilied  the  poft  at  the  Chickafaw  bluff:  And 
it  appears  in  the  foregoing  recital  that  they  were  going  to  de- 
molilli  the  port  at  the  Walnut  Hills :  and  the  reafon  afligned  is 
that  the  treaties  with  the  Indians  required  the  demolition  :  and 
governor  Gayofo  ailigns  but  one  motive  for  fufpending  that 
Operation— that  he  had  been  informed  of  the  unfettled  difpofl- 
tion  of  the  Indians  ;  yet  afterwards  this  reafon  (that  their  trea- 
ties with  the  Indians  required  the  demolition  of  the  ports)  is 
forgotten,  and  their  destruction,  or  their  delivery  with  all  the 
fortifications  and  other  works  Handing,  is  by  the  governors  made 
to  depend  entirely  on  the  ilfue  of  a  negociation  between  the 
governments  of  Spain  and  the  United  States!  Can  any  farther 
proof  be  wanting  to  juftify  me  in  calling  this  a  pretence?  But 
you  feem  to  rely  on  this  your  conftru&ion  of  the  Treaty  rela- 
tive to  the  pofts  :  You  have  urged  it  in  your  letter  to  me  of  the 
24th  of  June  ;  and  therefore  I  will  confider  it. 

The  2d  article  of  the  Treaty  having  defcribed  the  boundaries 
between  the  territories  of  the  United  States  and  Spain,  thus 
proceeds — "  And  it  is  agreed  that  if  there  mould  be  any  troops 
garrifons  or  fettlements  of  either  party,  in  the  territory  of  the 
other,  according  to  the  above  mentioned  boundaries,  they  ihall 
be  withdrawn  from  the  faid  territories  within  the  term  of  fix 
months  after  the  ratification  of  this  treaty,  or  fooner  if  it  be 
poilible  :  And  that  they  (hall  be  permitted  to  take  with  them 
all  the  goods  and  effecls  which  they  poiTefs."  But  to  juftify 
your  retention  of  the  pofts,  you  fay  that  the  demarcation  of  the 
boundary  line  fhould  precede  the  withdrawing  of  the  Camions : 
Yet  you  fuppofe  it  probable  and  his  Catholic  Majefty's  gover- 
nors well  knew,  that  the  Chickafaw  bluff — the  Walnut  Hills—* 
and  the  Natchez  are  within  the  territory  of  the  United  States. 

Governor  Gayofo  fpeaks  of  the  boundary  line  as  being  near 
Clarkefville,  a  place  many  miles  below  the  Natchez  ;  and  he 
alfo  knew  the  refult  of  Mr.  Ellicott's  aftronomical  obfervations 
on  the  fpot,  which  afcertained  the  Natchez  to  be  about  thirty 
nine  miles  north  of  the  fouth  boundary  of  the  United  States. 

There  being  then  not  a  fhadow  of  doubt  with  refpecl  to  the 
pofition  of  thele  pofts — that  they  are  all  within  the  territory  of 
the  United  States,  there  was  no  neceffity  previoufly  to  run  and 
mark  the  boundary  line :  which  befides,  if  fet  about  in  good 
earneft,  it  would  take  at  leaft  a  year  to  accomplifh,  through  a 
wildernefsof  many  hundred  miles  in  extent;  and  therefore  it 
never  could  have  been  contemplated  as  neceiTary  to  precede  the 
^evacuation  of  the  pofts  which  was  to  be  effected  injtx  mcntbs, 


— 

orfoonerifpoftwk.  Yet  fifteen  months  have  elapfed,  and  yon 
itill  keep  pofleffion. 

But  you  fuggeft  that  it  is  at  lead  doubtful  whether  by  the 
Treaty  it  was  intended  to  leave  the  fortifications  ftanding, 
when  the  garrifon  fhould  be  withdrawn.  You  fay  "  It  is  not 
to  be  prefumed  that  it  could  ever  have  been  the  intention  of  his 
Catholic  Majefty  to  deliver  up  fortifications,  which,  befides 
that  they  had  cofl  him  confiderable  fums  of  money,  may,  by 
the  effe<Sl  of  political  vicillitudes,  be  one  day  prejudicial  to  his' 
fubjecls."  I  feel  much  reluctance  to  attempt  the  refutation 
of  a  conftruclion  fo  obviouHy  erroneous.  It  is  probably  the  firft 
time  that  to  "  withdraw"  or  retire  from  a  place  has  been 
imagined  to  intend  its  dejlrutlijm.  If  at  the  formation  of  the 
treaty  the  demolition  of  the  pofts  had  been  intended ;  it  would 
afluredly  have  been  exprefled.  But  doubtlefs  the  idea  never  oc- 
curred, until  it  was  found  convenient  to  make  it  a  pretence  for 
holding  the  pofts.  The  phrafes  "  to  withdraw  a  garrifon," 
to'evacuate  a poft.or  country ,  have  as  determinate  a  meaning  as 
ally  in  the  Englilh  language  ;  and  their  meaning  is  afcertained 
by  frequent  ufe  in  treaties  ;  and  tvdeftroy  a  country  or  a  fortified 
place>  from  which  it  was  itipulated  to  "  withdraw"  an  army 
or  a  garrifon,  would  be  fuch  an  aclt  of  barbarifm  as  ought  ne- 
Ver  to  take  place  among  civilized  nations.  One  of  the  lateft 
treaties  made  by  the  United  States  (that  with  Great-Britain) 
has  the  fame  phrafe  "  His  Majefty  will  withdrew  all  his  troops 
and  garrifons  from  all  ports  and  places  within  the  boundary 
lines  afligned  by  the  treaty  of  peace  to  the  United  States. 
This  evacuation  mall  take  place  on  or  before  the  firft  day  of  June 
1796."  Andthefeexpreflionsareufedin  the  fame  treaty  as  equi- 
valent to  "  the  delivery  of  the  faid  pofts."  The  Britifh  treaty 
was  in  this  manner  accordingly  carried  into  efFect — the  Britifh 
troops  were  withdrawn,  and  the  works  left  jlanding.  The  Britifh 
officers  were  even  careful  not  to  expofe  the  works  to  accidental 
deft ru£t ion  :  for  as  the  American  troops  did  not  reach  the  pofts 
by  the  firft  of  June,  fmali  Britifh  guards  were  left  to  preferve 
the  works  from  injury  until  the  American  troops  arrived. 

By  the  treaty  concluded  at  Versailles  the  3^  of  September 
1783,  between  Great-Britain  and  Spain,  it  was  agreed,  "That 
the  King  of  Great-Britain  fhould  caufe  Eaft  Florida  to  be  eva- 
cuated three  months  after  the  ratification  of  that  treaty,  or  foon- 
er,  if  it  could  be  done."  The  evacuation  took  place,  but  no 
demolition  of  fortifications. 

In  the  preliminary  articles  of  peace  between  England,  France 
and  Spain,  figned  the  ^d  of  November  1762,  it  was  ftipulated 
"  That  as  foon  as  poffible  after  the  ratification  of  thefe  preli- 
minaries, France  fhould  evacuate  Cleves,  Wefel  and  Guelders,s 


57- 

and  generally  all  the  countries  belonging  to  the  King  of  Pruf- 
fia  :"  were  tbofe places  demolifhcdy  or  the  country  laid  wafte,  when 
the  troops  withdrew  r  Or  were  there  any  fubfequent  negocia- 
ations  to  remove  any  doubts  on  the  fubjecl  ? 

But  I  have  dwelt  too  long  on  a  point  that  really  required  no 
elucidation. 

On  this,  as  well  as  on  another  occafion,  you  have  thought 
fit  to  upbraid  me  with  (hewing  to  the  Britifh  Minifter  a  degree 
of  candour  and  confidence  which  you  infmuate  he  does  not  de- 
ferve,  and  which,  you  feem  to  think,  I  have  withheld  from 
you.  Yet,  Sir,  all  the  declarations  made  to  me  by  that  Mini- 
fter, verbally  and  in  writing,  touching  the  points  in  contro- 
verfy  between  you  and  me,  have  been  verified.  As  I  have  alrea- 
dy fa  id,  you  declared  to  me  that  you  had  jult  reafons  for  fufpe  cl- 
ing that  an  expedition  was  preparing  on  the  lakes  by  the  Fng- 
lifh,  in  order  to  attack  Upper  Louifiana.  The  Britiih  Mini- 
fter, in  the  firft  inftance,  affured  me  that  he  had  no  knowledge 
.of  it — and  his  fubfequent  enquiries  enabled  him  further  to  af- 
fure  me  that  no  fuch  expedition  had  been  or  was  intended  by 
the  Britifh  government.  And  I  have  in  another  place  offered 
other  reafons  which  confirm  the  truth  of  thefe  aiTurances.  Yet 
you  tell  me,  that  the  allurance  given  me  by  the  Britifh  Mini- 
fter, but  without  anyfignature  did  not  infpire  the  fervantsof  h  is 
Catholic  Majefty  with  the  fame  blind  confidence,  which  it  produ- 
ced in  me.  I  lhall  take  no  other  notice  of  this  remark,  thau 
to  put  you  right  in  point  of  facl.  The  note  of  the  Britiih  Mi- 
nifter containing  the  affiurance  to  which  you  refer,  is  not 
"  without  a  fignature:"  This  (like  other  official  notes  from 
that  Minifter)  has  his  fignature — his  name  written  with  his  own 
hand — at  the  head  of  it. 

You  declared  to  me  "  that  you  knew  to  a  certainty  that  the 
Englifh  had  made  propofitions  to  General  Clarke,  of  Georgia, 
in  order  to  avail  themfelves  of  his  influence  in  that  State,  to- 
gether with  fome  other  perfons,  for  making  a  diverfion,  or  fe- 
rious  attack  againft  Florida."  The  Britiih  Minifter  informed 
me  that  although  he  knew  nothing  of  General  Clarke  or  his 
expedition  from  Georgia,  a  proportion  had  been  made  to  him 
(the  Britiih  Minifter)  for  an  expedition  againft  the  Floridas : 
but  that  he  told  the  proje&or,  that  he  had  no'  power  to  autho- 
rize it :  and  befides,  that  there  were  among  other  objections 
to  the  plan,  two  of  great  weight — one  that  the  Indians  were 
to  be  employed — the  other,  that  it  would  violate  the  neutral 
rights  of  the  United  States.  The  Britifti  Minifter  has  fince 
(hewn  me  an  original  letter  from  Lord  Grenville,  dated  the 
8th  of  laft  April,  in  which  he  informs  tjie  Minifter,  that  if 

H 


58- 

there  were  no  other  objections  to  the  plan,  the  two  mentioned 
by  him,  viz.  that  it  could  not  be  executed  without  employing 
the  Indians — arid  without  violating  the  rights  of  the  United 
States,  would  be  fufficient  to  induce  the  Britifh  government  to 
reject  it. — This  proves,  Sir,  that  Mr  Lifton's  declarations  on 
this  point  were  not  "  vague  and  unauthentic"  as  you  pronounce 
them,  but  in  ftricr.  conformity  with  truth. 

As  to  General  Clarke  of  Georgia,  the  Britifh  Minifter  decla- 
red he  had  never  even  heard  of  him  ;  and  the  extra6t  of  the  let- 
ter from  Mr.  Jackfon,  the  diftridl  attorney  of  Georgia,  refpect- 
ing  General  Clarke  and  any  expedition  forming  there,  in 
behalf  of  the  Erigti/h  againft  the  Floridas,  will  incline  every 
candid  enquirer  at  leaft  to  doubt  whether  fuch  a  project  has 
ever  been  propofed  to  him.  We  fhall  afterwards  fee  that  Mr. 
Blount's  plot  does  not  appear  to  have  any  connection  with  an 
expedition  under  General  Clarke. 

Thus  you  fee,  Sir,  that  I  have  not  blindly  placed  a  confidence 
in  the  Britilh  Minifter :  for  aught  that  has  yet  appeared,  he 
was  entitled  to  the  credit  he  has  received. 

I  return  to  your  letter.  You  mention  your  communications 
to  the  Baron  de  Carondelet  refpecting  the  intended  expedition 
from  Canada :  from  that  moment,  you  fay,  imperious  neceiTity, 
and  the  great  principle  of  felf  defence,  made  his  Catholic  Ma- 
jefty's  officers  turn  their  thoughts  to  objects  of  a  more  urgent 
nature  than  running  the  boundary  line.  And  here  you  intro- 
duce "  Mr.  Blount's  letter,  and  the  late  detected  confpiracy, 
as  evincing  how  far  their  conduct  in  this  refpect  was  necef- 
fary.'"'  It  is  wonderful,  Sir,  that  you  mould  attempt  to  make 
it  be  believed  that  Mr.  Blount's  letter  and  the  late  detected  con- 
fpiracy  had  any  connection  with  the  expedition  which  you  fug- 
gefted  was  preparing  on  the  lakes  of  Canada  againft  Upper 
Louifiana.  All  that  is  yet  difcovered  of  Mr.  Blount's  project 
or  confpiracy,  proves  that  it  was  to  have  been  formed  in  one 
of  the  States  South  of  the  River  Ohio  ;  and  that  it  was  deftined 
againft  the  Floridas,  and  perhaps  Lower  Louiiiana,  I,  there- 
fore, feel  myfelf,  for  this  and  the  other  reafons  before  exhibit- 
ed, ftill  warranted  in  confidering  the  fufpeded  Canada  expedi- 
tion among  the  pretexts  for  delaying  to  evacuate  the  pofts,  and 
to  run  the  boundary  line  :  and  consequently  that  your  charge, 
that  I  have  in  this  inftance  "palpably  attempted  to  make 
groundlefs  and  unfair  impreffions  on  the  public  mind,"  is  alike 
unfounded  and  unbecoming  your  public  character  to  fuggeft. 

In  your  next  paragraph  you  thus  addrefs  me.  "  Nor  do 
your  ill  founded  iniinuations  ftop  here :  fentiments  and  expref- 
fions  ftill  more  violent,  flow  from  that  fame  hafty  pen."  This 
paifage  is  in  perfect  correfpondence  with  the  general  drain  of 


59- 

your  letter.     Whether  your  charge  is  correctly  made  is  now  to 
be  examined. 

I  am  ready  to  confefs  that  my  report  thus  ftigmatifed  was, 
from  the  preiiure  ofbufmefs,  written  in  hafte :  but  a  revificm 
of  it  fatisfies  me,  nevertheless,  that  it  is  not  inaccurate  in  its 
ftatements. 

You  quote  the  pafTage  in  my  report  which  has  called  forth 
this  reproach  ;  it  is  in  thefe  words — "  That  there  is  but  too 
much  reafon  to  believe  Mr.  Ellicott's  fufpicions  well  founded, 
that  an  undue  influence  has  been  exercifed  over  the  Indians  by 
the  officers  of  his  Catholic  Majefty,  to  prepare  them  for  a  rup- 
ture with  the  United  States."  And  then  you  lay  that  I  men-' 
tion  the  fource  of  thefe  "  dreadful  conjectures"  to  be,  a  private 
letter  from  Mr.  Sargent,  Secretary  of  the  North-weftern  Ter- 
ritory. Here  you  are  extremely  incorrect  ;  as  ufual  when  you 
undertake  to  recite  my  conclufions  and  the  facts  and  circum- 
ftances  jupon  which  they  are  formed.  It  is  from  "  a  view  of 
the  whole  correfpondence"  referred  to  in  my  reports  of  the  roth 
of  June  and  ^d  of  July. — On  the  intelligence  received  by  the 
Secretary  of  War — and  the  private  letter  from  Colonel  Sargent, 
that  I  drew  the  conclufion  you  have  quoted. 

Mr.  Eilicott  formed  his  fufpicions  on  the  fpot,  from  what 
was  pairing  before  him  ;  and  he  is  not  a  carelefs  or  undifcern- 
ing  obfervcr. 

General  Wilkinfon  fays — "  Letters  from  all  quarters  an- 
nounce the  di  (contents  and  menacing  afpect  of  the  Savages  ;  , 
two  white  men  have  been  recently  murdered  on  the  Ohio  below 
the  Cumberland  ;  and  the  Savages  beyond  the  Miffifippi,  and 
thofe  who  pafs  Maifac,  make  no  hefitation  to  avow  their  pur- 
pofe  for  war."  And  then  he  refers  to  a  letter  from  Colonel 
Hamtramck,  who  commands  the  United  S.tates  troops  at  De- 
troit, in  which  the  Colonel  fays — "  I  am  pretty  fure  that  both 
the  French  and  Spaniards  have  Emiiraries  among  the  Indians. 
I  have  it  from  indubitable  authority,  that  a  large  belt  [by  which 
he  meant  a  Speech]  from  the  Spaniards  is  now  travelling 
through  the  different  nations  ;"  meaning  the  nations  within  the 
territories  of  the  United  States. 

Colonel  Sargent  writes,  it  isxtrue,  a  private  letter ;  but  it  is  to 
a  public  Officer ;  and  his  fituation  as  Secretary,  and  Governor 
for  the  time,  of  the  North-weftern  Territory,  would  render  it 
his  duty  to  be  vigilent  for  its  fafety  ;  and  his  character  vouches 
for  the  accuracy  of  his  information  ;  and  you  do  not  queftion 
the  truth  of  any  part  of  his  ftatement. 

After  mentioning  that  the  Spaniards  were  reinforcing  their 

v  upper  pofts  on  the  Miffifippi,  that  upwards  of  three  hundred 

men  had  arrived  at  St.  Louis  and  were  electing  formidable 


€6. 

works  ;  he  adds — "  It  likewife  appears,  through  various  chan- 
nels, that  they  are  inviting  a  great  number  of  Indians  of  the 
territory  (meaning  of  the  United  States  north-well  of  the  Ohio) 
to  crofs  the  Miffifippi :  And  for  this  exprefs  purpofe  Mr.  Lor- 
amie,  an  officer  in  the  pay  of  the  crown,  made  a  tour  through 
all  this  country  lafl  fall ;  fmce  which  time  feveral  Indians  have 
been  fent  on  the  fame  errand,  and  generally  furnifhed  with 
plenty  of  cafh  to  defray  their  expenfes" — "  A  large  party  of 
the  Delawares  parted  down  White  River  about  the  6th  of  May, 
on  their  way  to  the  Spanifh  fide,  bearing  the  national  flag  of  Spam 
fent  them  from  St.  Louis. 

Lieutenant  Pope,  in  his  letter  of  May  gth  to  the  Secretary 
of  War,  fays—"  There  have  been  feveral  attempts  made  to 
draw  on  the  Indians  upon  my  troops  :  I  have  fully  afcertained 
this  fa£l,  and  demanded  of  the  Governor  to  have  a  principal 
a6lor  immediately  brought  to  punifhment,  or  fent  out  of  the 
country.  He  has  been  fent  for,  and  is  now  on  board  of  one  of 
the  gallies  which  is  'now  about  defcending  the  river." — And, 
Sir,  if  you  enquire,  you  will  find  that  this  "  principal  a6lor" 
(Rapelje  by  name)  was  one  of  Governor  Gayofo's  agents. 

Thefe,  Sir,  are  the  grounds  on  which  I  exprefTed  the  opi- 
nion, That  there  was  but  too  much   reafon  to  believe   Mr. 
Ellicott's  fufpicions  well  founded,  that  the  officers  of  Spain  had 
exercifed  an  undue  influence  over  the  Indians  to  prepare  them- 
for  a  rupture  with  the  United  States. 

This  detail,  Sir,  ftrikingly  (hews  how  little  you  have  under- 
flood,  and  how  entirely  you  have  mifreprefented  my  reafoning 
on  this  fubjecl:.  I  leave  you  to  reconcile  your  reflections  on  the 
Britifh  Minifler  and  his  nation  for  their  inhumanity  in  employ- 
ing the  Indians  in  the  American  war,  with  your  j unification  of 
the  Spanifh  officers  at  this  time,  in  fecuring  the' aid  of  the  In- 
dians in  your  war  with  the  Britifh.  "  The  Spaniards  (you  fay) 
have  fortified  St.  Louis  and  availed  themf elves  of  EVERY  MEANS 
OF  DEFENCE  which  the  country  afforded  ;"  meaning  by  the  in- 
genious expreffion  every  means  of  defence  which  the  country  afford- 
ed, the  employing  of  the  Indians. 

You  are  pleafed  next  to  charge  me,  in  your  cuflomary  flile, 
with  "  falling  into  the  mod  glaring  mconfiftency"  becaufe  I  re- 
mark that  although,  "  it  may  be  difficult  to  fay  whether  this 
plan  of  exciting  the  Indians  to  direc~l  hoflilities  againft  the 
United  States,  has  been  contemplated  and  promoted  by  any  of 
our  own  citizens  ;  yet  it  is  certain  that  one  or  more  of  thofe 
citizens  have  propofed  and  taken  meafures  to  detach  the  fouth- 
ern  Indians  from  the  interefts  of  the  United  States,  and  to  de- 
{Iroy  the  influence  of  the  public  agents  over  thofe  nations,  and 


thus  to  defeat  the  great  objects  of  their  appointment ;  the  chief 
of  which  is  to  preferve  peace." 

Having  quoted  this  paflage  from  my  report,  you  a(k  "  How 
is  it  poffible  to  reconcile  ftich  evident  contradictions'1  On  the 
one  hand  the  Spanifh  officers  are  thofe  who  excite  the  fouthern 
Indians  againft  the  United  States,  and  on  the  other  you  quickly 
follow  prefuming,  with  fufficient  foundation  in  my  opinion, 
that  it  may  be  fome  citizens  of  the  United  States."  Allow 
me,  Sir,  to  afk  in  my  turn,  How  it  was  poffible  for  you  not 
to  fee  that  here  there  is  no  contradiction?  Is  it  not  very  poffi- 
ble that  the  Spanifh  officers  might  be  courting  the  Chickafaws, 
who  live  above  the.  Natchez,  with  large  prefents,  and  be  pre- 
paring the  Choctaws,  who  dwell  along  the  Natchez  diftrict, 
and  the  Delawares,  Shawanefe,  Miamis,  and  other  tribes 
dwelling  in  the  territory  north-wed  of  the  Ohio,  for  waragainfl 
the  United  States,  while  Mr.  Blount  and  his  agents  were  detach- 
ing the  fouthern  tribes  of  Chcrokees  and  Creeks  from  the  in- 
terefls  of  the  United  States,  and  eventually  to  aid  the  Britifli 
in  an  enterprize  againft  the  Floridas  ?  The  Cherokees  and 
Creeks,  you  might  have  feen,  were  the  only  Indian  nations 
mentioned  in  governor  Blount's  letter.  And  is  it  not  very 
poffible,  if  thefe  two  nations  ihould  thus  be  led  to  war  againft 
the  Spanifh  pofleiiions,  that  they  might  not  be  excited  to  direEt 
hoftilities  againft  the  United  States  ?  And,  therefore,  that 
although  Mr.  Blount  might  contemplate  the  former,  he  might 
abftain  from  the  latter  ?  And  is  not  then  my  cautious  manner 
of  fpeaking  of  this  latter,  perfectly  correct  ? 

I  am  happy  to  arrive  at  your  laft  obfervation.  And  I  wifli 
it  was  not,  like  the  reft,  exceptionable  and  incorrect.  Thefe- 
are  your  words — "  Reflecting  the  laft  article  of  your  report, 
I  have  only  to  obferve,  that  although  you  have  conftantly 
allured  me  that  government  had  not  the  leaft  information  re- 
fpecting  the  fubject  of  my  reprefentations,  and  although  the 
letter  of  Mr.  Jackfon,  of  Georgia,  appears  to  coincide  with 
your  ideas,  nevertheless  time  has  fhewn  that  I  have  complied 
with  my  duty  by  not  repofing  on  fuch  afiurances.  The  plot 
is  difcovered,  and  nobody  any  longer  doubts  the  expedition  was 
to  have  taken  place." 

The  expreffion  that  "  you  complied  with  your  duty  in  not 
repofing  on  fuch  a durances"  may  mean  that  you  thought  the 
aiTurances  deceitful^  and,  therefore,  not  meriting  belief.  Per- 
haps you  did  not  intend  this.  Perhaps  you  meant  no  more 
than  that  the  government  had  been  "  remifs"  in  its  duty,  in 
not  purfuing  with  eagernefs  the  trains  of  your  various  fufpici- 
xons.  But  I  muft  fhow  you  that  here  (as  in  all  other  inftances, 
your  criminations  are  void  of  foundation,  in  either  point  of  view. 


62. 

The  laft  article  of  the  report  refpects  general  Clarke  of 
Georgia,  to  -whom  you  faid  "  you  knew  of  a  certainty  that  the 
Engliih  had  made  proportions,,  in  order  to  avail  themfelves  of 
his  influence  in  that  iiate,  with  fome  other  perfons,  for  mak- 
ing a  diverfion  or  ferious  attack  againll  Florida:"  and  you  add 
that  "  you  do  not  doubt  that  in  confeqtience  of  your  informa- 
tion, the  executive  government  will  take  the  proper  fteps  that 
Georgia  alfo  mould  not  infringe  the  laws  of  neutrality."  Here 
you  confine  your  requefts  to  Georgia,  that  me  might  not  in- 
fringe the  laws  of  neutrality  :  and  my  letter  to  Charles  Jack- 
fon,  efquire,  the  diflrict  attorney  of  that  (late,  mows  that  the 
government  took  prompt  meafures  to  defeat  the  project  of 
general  Clarke  and  his  aflbciates,  if  fuch  a  project  exifted.  _  I 
fuppofe  none  did  exift  :  You  acknowledge  that  the  letter  from 
Mr.  Jack  fon  coincides  with  my  ideas.  Your  "  certain  know- 
ledge" of  an  intended  expedition  in  favour  of  the  Englifh  from 
Georgia  againft  Florida,  under  general  Clarke,  you  have  ne- 
ver fupported  by  a  madow  of  evidence.  If  you  pofleifed  any 
evidence  of  the  fact,  it  would  be  eafy  to  produce  it.  What 
you  call  your  "  certain  knowledge"  could  reft  only  on  infor- 
mation, or  the  teftimony  of  others,  which  might  be  as  falfe 
or  as  vague  and  inconclufive,  as  the  information  about  the 
Canada  expedition  ;  which  I  hope  I  have  proved,  to  your  con- 
viction, never  to  have  exilted,  even  in  idea.  Yet  you  declared 
tome  that  you  had  "  jitft  reafzns  for  fufpecting  that  expedition 
was  preparing  on  the  lakes:"  and  hence  how  can  I  avoid  con- 
cluding, that  your  "  certain  knowledge"  in  one  cafe,  like  your 
"  juft  reafons"  in  the  other,  were  without  a  fufficient  foun- 
dation. 

But  you  fay  "  The  plot  is  difcovered,  and  nobody  any  lon- 
ger doubts  that  the  expedition  was  to  have  taken  place." 
Strange  remark  !  Juft  the  reverfe  of  it  mould  have  been  made. 
For  although  there  is  a  difcovery  of  Mr.  Blount's  plot,  its  ex- 
tent is  by  no  means  afcertained  ;  and  far  from  nobody  doubting, 
probably  every  body  doubts  whether  the  projected  expedition 
•was  to  have. taken  place.  It  was  not  to  be  undertaken  but  in 
conjunction  with  a  Britim  force — and  on  the  propofal  of  the 
expedition  to  the  Britim  government  it  was  totally  rejected. 
Even  Mr.  Blount,  who,  if  the  project  was  adopted,  expefted 
io  be\at  the  head  of  it,  ventures  no  farther  than  to  fay  he  believed 
that  the  plan  would  be  attempted,  but  if  attempted,  that  it 
would  not  be  till  the  "  fall :"  and  confequently  your  zeal  in 
March  and  April,  for  which  at  the  expence  of  decency  towards 
the  American  government,  you  take  to  yourfelf  fo  much  cre- 
dit, had  then  no  juft  object.  This  zeal  of  yours  is  difplayed 
in  the  information  you  gave  to  the  Baron  de  Carondelet,  in 


63- 

March  or  April,  of  the  expedition  fuppofed  to  be  preparing 
in  Canada  againft  Upper  Louifiana:  yet  you  would  now  at- 
tempt to  juftify  this  zeal  by  the  plot  of  Mr.  Blount ;  although 
this  plot  and  the  Canada  expedition  were  wholly  diftincl  and 
unconnected. 

I  fhall  conclude  this  long  letter  with  your  eleven  pofitions, 
which  you  ftate  with  as  much  ferious  formality  as  if  they 
were  all  of  them  important,  and  all  of  them  fupported  by  fa6ts 
or  juft  reafoning :  But  the  details  I  have  given  demonftrate 
that  thefe  pofitions  are  either  unfounded,  or  fimple  propofiti- 
ons  of  not  the  fmalleft  confequence. 

Thefe  are  your  pofitions  addrefled  to  me  in  your  own  words. 

"  i ft.  That  on  the  ayth  of  February  I  gave  you  fufficient 
particulars  refpecling  the  intended  expedition,  to  have  at- 
tracted the  attention  of  this  government." 

Anfwer.  I  have  offered  reafons  to  prove  that  you  gave  me 
no  particulars,  but  only  mentioned  your  fufp>cionsy  and  that  you 
promifed  to  give  me  your  reprefentations  in  writing;  for 
which,  of  courfe,  it  was  proper  for  me  to  wait. 

"  2.  That  altho'  to  this  verbal  communication,  I  added 
another  in  writing  on  the  2d  of  March,  the  Prefident  had  not 
the  leaft  knowledge  of  it  on  the  9th  of  the  fame  month ;  and 
that  without  doubt  you  muft  have  had  very  powerful  motives 
to  prevent  you  from  communicating  it  to  him." 

Anfwer.  I  have  accounted  for  the  delay  in  a  fatisfaftory 
manner.  I  have  fhewn  that  I  had  abundant  reafon  to  conclude 
your  fufpicions  to  be  wholly  unfounded,  and  for  attaching  no 
fort  of  confequence  to  them.  The  event  demonftrates  that  I 
was  right ;  and  that  inftead  of  very  powerful  motives-,  none 
were  needed  for  a  delay  of  only  four  or  five  days,  or  for  a 
much  longer  period ;  and  that  to  notice  your  naked  fufpicions 
at  all,  was  not  an  acl:  of  necedity,  but  of  complaifance.  I 
might  with  juftice  complain  of  your  delay  to  anfwer  my  letter 
of  the  1 6th  of  March,  on  a  fubjecl:  of  very  high  importance  to 
the  United  States,  I  mean  the  evacuation  of  the  ports.  I  will 
not  fay  that  you  were  negligent — or  "  remifs" — but  I  will  fay 
that  for  a  whole  month  you  omitted  to  give  me  your  (hort  and 
unfatisfaclory  anfwer.  The  indifpofition  which  you  aflign  as 
the  caufe  of  the  delay,  did  not  prevent  you  from  writing  on 
other  fubje&s — nor  long  from  going  abroad. 

"  3.  That  it  does  not  appear  by  the  documents  prefented  by 
the  Secretary  of  War,  that  government  had  given  orders  to  the 
military  commanders  to  caufe  the  territory  and  neutrality  of 
the  United  States  to  be  refpecled." 

N  Anfwer.  I    have   ihewn    that  none  were   neceffary  to  be 
given. 


64- 

"  4.  That  you  made  to  the  Englifh  Miniiter  a  communi- 
cation which  in  my  opinion  you  ought  not,  and  that  even  if 
you  thought  it  necefTary,  you  delayed  doing  it  for  two  months, 
that  is  from  the  27th  of  February  to  the  2$th  of  April,  altho' 
it  reflected  a  mod  urgent  and  important  object." 

Anfwer.  On  the  28th  of  April,  I  informed  you  by  letter 
that  I  had  communicated  to  the  Britilh  Minifter  your  fufpici- 
ons  of  an  expedition  preparing  by  the  Englifh  againft  Upper 
Louifiana  ;  and  as  for  upwards  of  two  months  you  expretfed 
no  diflTatisfaction  on  account  of  this  communication,  I  might 
well  conclude  you  did  not  think  it  improper.  Nay  in  your  let- 
ter of  July  nth,  which  I  am  now  anfwering,  you  refer  with 
apparent  approbation  to  this  very  communication,  connected 
with  the  declaration  which  accompanied  it  to  the  Britilh  Mi- 
nifter, that  the  Prefident  could  not  confent  to  the  march  of 
any  troops,  either  Britifh  or  Spanifh,  through  the  territory  of 
the  United  States  ;  and  you  confider  it  as  a  "  determinate  dif- 
pofition"  of  the  American  government  on  this  point.  I  have 
alfo  ihewn,  that  admitting  this  communication  to  Mr.  Lifton 
to  be  proper,  I  did  not  delay  doing  it  for  two  months  nor  two 
weeks;  altho'  it  refpected  at  beft  but  an  imaginary  project. 

"  5.  That  the  Baron  de  Carondelet  could  very  well  have 
received  my  letters,  without  its  neceiTarily  following  that  his 
had  come  to  hand." 

Anfwer.  I  have  ihewn  that  you  did  not  underftand  my  rea- 
foning  on  this  point ;  which  went  to  prove  that  your  anfwer 
of  the  1 7th  of  April  to  my  letter  of  the  i6th  of  March,  about 
the  evacuation  of  the  pofts,  was  wanting  in  candour. 

(<  6.  That  the  Baron  did  not  reprefent  Mr.  Ellieott's  not 
writing  to  him  officially  as  a  complaint,  but  as  an  obfervation, 
aud  that  in  fact  he  never  has  done  it  in  thofe  terms." 

Anfwer.  I  have  fhewn  that  whether  the  Baron's  afTertion 
fhould  have  been  called  a  complaint  or  an  obfervation  was  per- 
fectly immaterial ;  I  meant  to  fhew  it  was  unfounded,  and  this 
you  yourfelf  admit. 

"  7.  That  the  proofs  you  alledge  to  exculpate  Mr.  Ellicott 
refpecting  his  intentions  of  taking  the  fort  of  Natchez  by 
furprize  are  purely  negative." 

Anfwer.  I  offered  them  only  as  negative  proofs.  Yet  when 
one  complaint  or  aflertion  a^ainfl  Mr.  Ellicott  was  known  and 
acknowledged  not  to  be  true,  the  negative  teftimony  of  gentle- 
men likely  to  be  well  informed,  would  be  deemed  fufficient  to 
bring  another,  and  in  its  nature  very  improbable,  complaint 
or  a'Hertion  of  the  fame  perfon,  into  difcredit. 

"  8.  That  it  is  not  merely  pretences,  but  very  powerful  re?- 
fons  which  have  impeded  the  evacuation  of  the  Pofts,  and  the 
running  of  the  boundary  line.'* 


65- 

Anfwer.  The  point  of  view  in  which  I  have  now  exhibited 
the  conduit  of  the  Spanifh  governors  relative  to  the  evacuation 
of  the  pofts,  and  the  running  of  the  boundary  line,  I  fhould  fup- 
pofe  might  convince  you  that  the  caufes  which  they  have  offered 
for  the  delay,  are  mere  pretences:  the  American  citizens,  to 
whom  you  have  appealed,  have  been  convinced  only  by  read- 
ing the  printed  documents,  without  any  comments. 

"  9.  That  the  infmuations  with  which  you  are  willing  to 

perfuade  the    American  people    that   our  arming  is  directed 

it  them,    are  unjult  as  well    as    unfounded,   as  by   Mr. 

Blount's  letter  it  is  clearly  demonftrated  to  be  a  precaution  for 

the  mere  purpofe  of  defence." 

Anfwer.  The  grounds  of  my  fuggeftions,  which  you  call 
"  infmuai  ions"  are  detailed  in  this  letter,  and  embrace  too  ma- 
ny facts  and  circumitances  to  be  abridged  :  permit  me  to  defirc 
you  to  review  them.  I  (hall  only  repeat,  that  nothing  is  more 
certain  than  that  Mr.  Blount's  letter  has  not  the  remotelt  refe- 
rence to  the  fufpected  Canada  expedition  ;  which  is  your  only 
pretence  for  reinforcing  the  ports  in  Upper  Louiliana — for 
calling  the  Indians  to  your  aid — for  holding  the  poits  at  the 
Natchez,  and  Walnut  Hills — and  for  delaying  to  run  the 
boundary  line. 

"  ro.  That  you  evidently  contradict  yourfelf,  when  on  one 
hand  you  are  pleafed  to  attribute  to  us  the  movements  of  the 
Indians,  and  in  the  very  next  paragraph  you  mew  it  might 
proceed  from  American  Citizens,  as  it  actually  does,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Blount's  letter;  and  that  he  acted  with  the  know- 
ledge and  intelligence  of  the  very  fame  Britifh  Minifter,  in 
whofe  private  notes,  without  fignafure,  and  perhaps  not  of  his 
own  hand  writing,  you  place  fuch  implicit  confidence. 

Anfwer.  I  have  ("hewn  that  there  is  not  a  ihadow  of  contra- 
dict! ->n.  in  my  obfervations  on  this  fubject ;  and  your  aflertions 
to  the  contrary  muft  proceed  only  from  your  not  understanding 
them.  You  fay  that  Mr.  Blount  acted  in  this  matter  with 
the  knowledge  and  intelligence  of  the  Britifh  Minifter.  This 
is  not  likely  lo  be  true.  It  is  in  proof,  by  other  evidence  than 
the  Britifh  Minifter's  notes,  that  he  did  not  and  could  not  au- 
thorize the  projected  expedition  againft  the  Floridas — and  par- 
ticularly that  one  of  his  itrong  objections  againit  it  was,  that  it 
contemplated  the  employing  of  the  Indians  \  although  he  thought 
it  proper  to  fubmit  the  projed  to  the  confideration  and  decifion 
of  his  government.  Nobody  therefore  will  believe  that  he  au- 
thorized Mr.  Blount,  or  was  even  privy  to  his  meafures,  for 
preparing  the  Indians  for  war.  Befides,  doclor  Romayne, 
who  may  be  prefumed  to  be  well  acquainted  with  Mr.  Blount 's 


66. 

plot,  fuggefts  thaj  it  is  not  the  project  oi'Fered  to  Mr.  Lifton 
by  Chilholm.  Thefe  are  his  words  :  "  Mr.  Blount  is  totally 
unknown  to  Mr.  Liflon,  and  Jo  are  all  hi 's  viczvs."  And  there 
5s  a  paffage  in  Mr.  Blount's  letter  which  countenances  the  doc- 
tor's affertion,  and  indicates,  that  although  Chifholm  and 
Blount  had  fome  communications  with  each  other,  yet  that 
their. views  were  not  precifely  the  fame.  Mr.  Blount,  in  his 
letter  to  Carey,  fays,  "  Where  captain  Chifholm  is,  I  do  not 
know.  I  left  him  in  Philadelphia,  in  March,  and  he  fre- 
quently vifited  the  Miniiler  and  fpoke  upon  the  fubjecl: ;  but 
I  believe  he  will  go  into  the  Creek  nation  by  way  of  South- 
Carolina  or  Georgia.  He  gave  out  he  was  going  to  England ; 
but  I  did  not  believe  him."  Thefe  lait  words  afford  a  pretty 
ftrong  proof  that  they  were  nota&ing  wholly  in  concert.  Pro- 
bably Mr.  Blount  endeavoured  to  perfuade  Chiiholm  that  he 
would  co-operate  in  the  profecution  of  his  fcheme  ;  while  at 
the  fame  time  he  might  have  another  of  his  own  or  in  concert 
with  doctor  Rornayne,  and  ftand  ready  in  the  event  of  things, 
to  make  his  advantage  of  either  ;  whichever  mould  offer  the  bed 
profp'e&  of  fuccefs:  Do6tor  Romayne,  you  fee,  fays  that  Mr. 
Blount  is  totally  unknown  to  Mr.  Lifton  :  But  it  is  well 
known  that  Mr.  Blount  was  your  frequent  gueft,  and  intimate 
companion  ;  and  that  he  was  on  this  intimate  footing  with 
you  during  the  whole  time  -that  you  were  reprefenting  to  the 
government,  your  fufpicions  of  Britiih  expeditions.  Yet  after 
the  difcovery  of  the  confpiracy  was  made  public,  you  formally 
requefted  the  American  government  to  puniih  him  for  fo  fcan- 
dalous  a  crime.  -But  feeing  that  Mr.  Blount  was  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States,  and  not  a  fubjecl  of  Spain,  it  would  have 
been  decent  in  you  to  have  left  him  with  his  own  government 
\vithout  iiiterpofmg  your  advice.  But  efpecially  wrhen  you 
knew  that  the  Prelldent  had  laid  his  letter  before  Congrefs  ; 
and  the  two  Houfes  were  deliberating  on  the  modes  of  pu-nifhing 
him  ;  when  the  mveftigation  had  proceeded  fo  far  that  a  com- 
mittee of  the  Senate  had  reported  a  refolution  to  expel  Mr. 
Blount  from  the  Senate  ;  and  a  committee  of  the  Houfe  had 
reported  a  refolution  that  he  mould  be  impeached  for  high  crimes 
and  mifdemeanors :  For  you  then  to  interfere  was  fingularly 
improper ;  and  it  was  fuch  an  oftentatious  difplay  of  zeal,  as 
under  all  the  known  eircumftances,  fuggefts  more  than  one 
interpretation. 

"n.  That  although  in  all  your  official  communications, 
you  have  always  manifested  to  me  that  the  American  govern- 
ment knew  of  nothing  which  indicated  any  foundation  for  my 
fufpicions,  Mr.  Blount's  letter  clearly  proves  that  I  was  per- 
fectly in  the  right." 


Anfwer.  This  remark  is  perfectly  in-confequential ;  for  your 
communications  exhibited  your  fufpicions  of  projected  expedi- 
tions only  from  Canada  and  Georgia :  and  I  have  mown  that 
Mr.  Blount's  letter  has  no  relation  to  either. 

I  thought  I  had  reached  the  end  of  your  criminations :  but 
in  your  concluding  paragraph  you  accufe  me  of  an  "  unjufi: 
partiality,"  meaning,  no  doubt,  towards  the  Britjfh  minifter 
and  his  nation.  The  details  I  have  given  in  this  letter,  I  fruit 
•vvHl  abundantly  prove  that  this  charge  is  as  unfounded  as  it  is 
indecent.  Thofe  details  verify  the  representations  of  the  con- 
duel  of  certain  Spanifh  officers  which  are  given  in  my  report 
of  the  3d  of  July  to  the.  Prefident.  If  the  truth  has  excited 
any  unpleafant  fenfationts,  thofe  only  are  to  blame  whofe  inju- 
rious acl:s  obliged  me  plainly  to  declare  it.  Inftead  of  this  talk, 
I  mould  have  been  happy  to  execute  the  grateful  of  nee  of  dat- 
ing to  the  Prefident  the  good  faith  and  amicable  manner  in 
which  the  officers  of  his  Catholic  Majefty- had  executed  i  ](,•„• 
treaty  of  friendfliip,  limits  and  navigation  between  our  n\4. 
nations. 

You  thiirk  alfo  that  my  report  to  the  Prefident  is  not  caJcu-ii- 
ted  to  ftrengthen  the  bonds  of ffieridjhip  which  un:te  Spurn  and  Ame- 
rica. Friendship,  Sir,  cannot  fublift  without  mi'.:  '^nce : 
and  confidence  fprings  from  Jincerity.  But  the  proceedings  ot 
the  Spanifh  officers,  which  are  the  fubjecl  ot  this  corjefpcn- 
dence,  have  fhaken  the  confidence  of  the  government  and  of 
the  citizens  of  rhe  United  States  ;  and  my  report  to  ilvj  Preli  - 
dent  only  exhibits  a  fummary  of  thofe  proceedings  ;  or  rather 
the  plain  and  obvious  conclufions  from  the  authentic  i 
and  cira.'inftances  detailed  in  the  documents,  then  and  hefoir 
prefented  to  his  view.  And  I  dare  venture  to  fay,  that  every 
independent  American  has  from  the  fame  premrfes  drawn  the 
fame  conclufions. 

Nothing,  Sir,  will  give  truer  fatisfaSicn  to  the  government 
and  citizens  of  the  United  States  than  to  fee  fucli  a  change  in 
the  proceedings  of  the  Spanifh  officers  as  will  reftore  confi- 
dence. The  change  would  be  eafy,  and  the  effect  certain. 
Let  them  withdraw  their  troops  and  garrifms  from  the  territories  of 
the  United  States.  Let  them  commence  and  projecute  the  running  of 
the  boundary  line.  Let  them  ceafe  to  fiop,  contrml  or  regulate  the 
pajjage  of  our  citizens  on  the  Mijfftfippi,  feeing  f.hefs  have  a  right  to 
navigate  it  with  perfect  freedom — And  let  them  ceafe  to  fend  Agents  cr 
F.miffaries  among  the  Indians  refiding  within  the  territories  of  the 
United  States.  When  they  mall  do  thefe  things  (and  the  good 
faith  of  his  Catholic  Majefty  pledged  in  the  treaty  renders  their 
doing  them  an  indifpenfable  duty)  then  we  ih all  forget  what 
is  pall ;  our  confidence  will  return  ;  and  with  it  that  beneficial 


68. 

intercourfe  and  thofe  friendly  a6ls  by  which  neighbours  may 
promote  each  others  interefts,  welfare  and  happinefs.  And 
for  fuch  a  ftate  of  things,  whatever  you  may  have  imagined  to 
the  contrary,  no  one  more  ardently  wifhes,  and  on  its  arrival, 
no  one  will  more  fmcerely  rejoice,  than 

Your  obedient  fervant, 

TIMOTHY  PICKERING. 


(No.   14.) 

(TRANSLATION.) 

S  I  R. 

THE  day  before  yefterday,  the  I7th,  your  letter  of  the  8th 
inftant  was  received  at  my  houfe  at  Philadelphia,  and  yefter- 
day,  the  iSth,  it  came  to  my  hands  at  this  city.  I  avail  my- 
felf  of  the  firft  opportunity  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  this 
your  anfwer  to  my  letter  of  the  nth  of  July  laft,  and  as  the  ex- 
amination of  its  contents  would  lead  us  to  an  endlefs  difcufTion, 
I  confine  myfelf  to  mention  to  you  that  v>  hen  I  had  the  honor 
of  giving  you  the  firft  notice  relative  to  the  projected  expedition 
againft  Louifiana,  with  all  the  particulars  referred  to  in  my  faid 
letter,  you  were  alone  in  your  Cabinet :  That  two  days  after  I 
went  to  fpeak  to  you  on  another  fubjecl:,  and  having  there  met 
the  Secretary  of  War,  Mr.  M'Henry,  I  embraced  the  oppor- 
tunity of  fpeaking  anew  concerning  it  ;  and  if  then  I  fpoke 
in  general  terms,  it  was  doubtlefs  to  avoid  the  repetition  of 
what  I  had  communicated  fo  fhortly  before.  As  it  appears  that 
you  have  forgotten  thiscircumftance,  it  is  not  extraordinary  that 
it  mould  have  efcaped  your  memory  in  like  manner  with  all  the 
particulars  of  my  firft  conference,  mentioned  in  my  above  cited 
letter. 

J  offer  myfelf  to  your  difpofition,  and  hope  that  God  will 
preferve  you  many  years. 

Your  moft  obedient  fervant, 
CARLOS  MARTINEZ  de  YRUJO. 

New-York >   igth  Auguft,   1797. 

Timothy  Pickering,  Efquire,  \ 
Secretary  of  State.  f 


69- 

(No.    15.) 

(TRANSLATION.) 
S  I  R, 

-. 

WHEN  the  Kincr  my  mafler  appointed  me  his  Envoy  Ex- 
traordinary to  th'/  United  States  of  America,  immediately  after 
having  made  with  them  a  treaty  the  moft  liberal  and  generous,* 
I  flattered  myfelf,  that  the  principal  exercife  of  my  functions 
would  be  to  give  and  receive  repeated  proofs  of  the  union  and 
friendlnip  fo  intimate  by  the  bands  ot  that  Treaty.  Inftead 
of  thofe  flattering  expectations  judge  of  m.y  feelings  on  fee- 
ing them  entirely  vanilTied,  and  rinding  in  that  convention, 
•which  I  trufted  would  forever  have  united  us,  the  origin  of 
difagreement  and  contention  unfortunately  too  well  founded  on 
our  part. 

I  have  before  made  known  to  you  the  juft  motives  which  had 
determined  the  Spanilh  Commandants  of  Louisiana,  to  fufpend 
in  part  the  entire  execution  of  the  treaty,  as  no  injury  to  the 
United  States  would  flow  from  a  Ibort  delay  ;  and  it  might 
occafion  great  injury  to  the  fecurity  of  the  pofTefiions  of  the 
King  to  abandon  certain  ports,  which  under  prefent  circum- 
ftances  would  leave  Louisiana  open  to  the  attacks  of  the  Eng- 
lifli,  and  expofed  to  the  effects  of  the  evil  intention  of  fome 
Citizens  of  the  United  States.  I  have  alfo  heretofore  (hewn 
to  you,  that  the  American  Agents  at  the  Natchez,  far  from 
contributing  to  preferve  that  union  and  harmony  which  is  fp 
[uitable  to  the  two  nations,  conducted  themfelves  in  a  manner 
highly  imprudent ;  and  even  that  I  had  rcafon  to  believe  that 
they  intended  to  obtain  pofTeflion  of  the  fort  by  furprize.  The 
lad  advices  which  I  have  received  from  thoie  parts,  and  the 
documents  I  herewith  tranfmit  to  you,  appear  to  me  to  prove 
it  in  fuch  manner  that  I  cannot  but  confider  thofe  fufpicions 
as  being  very  well  founded. 

For  fome  time  paft  the  conduct  in  this  refpect  of  the  Com- 
mandant of  the  American  troops,  Mr.  Piercy  Smith  Pope,  arid 
at  firlt  of  Mr.  Andrew  Ellicott,  has  been  irregular,  provoking, 
and  in  fome  degree  hoftile.  The  Commandant  Don  Manuel 
Gayofo  had  pofitive  advice  that  in  the  camp  of  faid  Pope  a 
great  number  of  ladders  were  making,  and  that  arms  (armas 

*  Altho'  you  only  characterize  as  jufl,  the  ftipulations  of  the  treaty 
with  Spain,  I  will  take  the  liberty  of  obferving,  that,  abftraftedly 
from  all  the  points  which  I  touched  in  my  letter  of  the  6th  May,  the 
Spanifh  fovereignty  over  the  Natchez  being  in  right  of  conqueft  at  the 
period  of  the  peace  of  1783,  if  the  United  States  obtained  this  pcffef- 
<fion  by  a  voluntary  convention,  they  owe  it  only  to  the  generoftty  of 
Spain. 


70. 

blancas)  were  preparing,  evincing  by  thefe  preparations  their 
determination  to  affault  the  fort.  The  firmnefs  and  vigilence 
of  the  Governor  Don  Manuel  Gayofo  appears  to  have  induced 
them  to  alter  their  intentions,  and  being  well  perfuaded,  that 
the  forts  of  Negates  and  the  Natchez  could  not  be  taken  either 
by  force  or  furprize,  they  availed  themfelves  of  fome  profligate 
people  to  foment  an  infurreclion,  which  it  appears  was  to  have 
taken  effect  on  the  I2th  June,  and  which  the  prudence  and 
preponderance  of  the  wealthy  inhabitants  were  alone  capable 
effectually  to  ftop. 

The  official  letters  of  Mr.  Piercy  Smith  Pope  and  Mr.  An- 
drew Ellicott,  numbered  3  and  4,  and  the  documents  5  and  6, 
evidently  mow  the  part  which  both  of  them  took  in  that  popu- 
lar commotion,  however  they  may  pretend  to  deny  it  :  fince 
afluredly  nothing  of  this  kind  would  have  happened,  if  they 
had  not  aifumed  without  any  authority  whatever  to  treat  of  and 
determine  fome  points  and  difcuilions  of  a  political  nature 
foreign  to  their  CommiiTion,  with  a  publicity  and  arrogance 
calculated  to  compromit  the  two  powers,  explaining  them- 
felves without  candour  and  with  intent  to  lead  affray  the  popu- 
lace on  the  principal  point  of  the  difficulty  which  had  occa- 
fioned  a  wifh  on  both  fides  for  an  explanation  of  the  doubts 
which  arofe  refpecHng  the  treaty. 

If  their  conduct  has  been  provoking  and  infuhing,  their  lan- 
guage towards  the  Spanifh  Government  has  not  been  lefs  fo. 
Mr.  Andrew  Ellicott  in  his  letter  of  the  I3th  of  June,  to  Don 
Manuel  Gayofo,  fays,  to  embrace  the  means  which  will  finally 
tiffure  to  them  their  happincfs  cannot  be  cenfured,  (alluding  to  the 
change  of  the  people  of  the  Natchez  from  the  dominion  of  the 
King  my  mafter  to  that  of  the  United  States)  this  is  clearly  an 
indirect  attack  upon  the  Spanifh  Government,  as  unjuft  as  im- 
proper on  the  part  of  an  Agent  of  a  friendly  nation. 

The  document  number  5,  figned  by  Mr.  Ellicott  and  Piercy 
Smith  Pope,  dated  the  I3th  June,  evidences,  by  the  manner  in 
which  it  is  written,  their  intentions  to  deceive  the  public.  At 
that  time  and  even  fince  they  neither  had  nor  could  have  juft 
ground  for  officially  fpeaking  of  an  approaching  rupture  be- 
tween the  United  States  and  Spain  ;  yet  you  will  fee,  that  they 
fpeak  of  it  as  a  thing  at  hand  and  almoft  inevitable,  relying 
only  on  the  preparations  for  felf-defence  made  in  fome  forts  on 
the  banks  of  the  Miflifippi,  and  which  they  knew  to  be  incon- 
fequence  of  the  intended  expedition  of  the  Englifh. 

The  whole  tenor  of  their  correfpondence  and  particularly 
the  document  number  6  leaves  no  doubt  that  thefe  Agents  have 
interfered  in  political  matters  utterly  foreign  to  their  commif-t. 
fion,  engaging  themfelves  to  'co-operate  wfih  the  Committee  ap- 


71- 

printed  to  obtain  the  due  execution  ofjuftice,'  and  APPROVING  of  the 
propofitions  prefented  to  Governor  Gayofo. 

The  repeated  declarations  you  have  made  to  me,  that  the  in- 
tention and  defire  of  the  United  States  are  to  preferve  peace  and 
a  good  understanding  with  Spain,  leave  me  no  room  to  doubt, 
thai  the  fcandalous  and  infulting  conducl:  of  Mr.  Ellicott,  at  firfl, 
and  finally  of  Captain  Piercy  Smith  Pope,  is  purely  arbitrary, 
without  any  other  guide  than  their  pailions  and  individual  in 
terefts ;  and  at  the  fame  time  I  can  do  no  lefs  than  apply  to  you 
in  the  name  of  the  King  my  mafter,  in  order  that  for  fuch 
repeated  infults  there  may  be  given  to  us  due  fatisfadlion  as 
neceiTary  to  Spain  as  becoming  for  the  United  States. 

God  preferve  you  many  years. 

Your  moft  obedient  and  humble  fcrvant, 
CARLOS  MARTINEZ  de  YRUJO. 

Philadelphia ,  gtb  Oflober,  1797. 

Timothy  Pickering,  Efquire,  ") 
Secretary  of  State.  / 


"The  Documents  referred  to  in  the  preceding  letter,  are 

(No.  i.)  Governor  Gayofo's  letter  of  June  13,  to  Mr.  Ellicott, 
This  is  the  fame  with  the  document  No.  2.  before  inferted. 

(No.  2.  A.)  Governor  Gayofo's  letter  to  Lieut.  P.  Pope,  of 
June  13. 

(No.  3.  A.)  Lieutenant  Pope's  anfwer  of  the  fame  date. 

(No.  4.)  Mr.  Ellicott's  anfwer  to  Governor  Gayofo,  of  June 
13. — This  is  the  fame  as  the  document  No.  3.  before 
inferted. 

(No.  5.  A.)  Advice  from  Mr.  Ellicott  and  Lieutenant  Pope,  to 
the  people,  to  remain  quiet. 

(No.  6.)  Their  approbation  of  the  articles  of  pacification  be- 
,.  tween  Governor  Gayofo  and  the  inhabitants. — This  is  the 
*  fame  as  the  preceding  document  No.  8. 


[  No.  2.  A.  ] 

Governor  Gaycfo,  to  Captain  Pope. 
S  I  R, 

FROM  repeated  information  of  which  I  am  poiTeiTed,  it  ap- 
pears certain  (and  the  conduct  of  fome  of  the  inhabitants  of 
this  government  equally  manifeft  it)  that  a  number  of  the  fub- 
je&s  of  his  Majefty  meditate  and  intend  to  rife  and  hoftily  at- 
tack the  fort,  unmindful  of  the  oath  of  fidelity,  which  they 
have  taken,  and  of  the  benign  prote6tion  which  the  govern- 
ment has,  dilpenfed  to  them  for  many  years,  and  declaring 
themfelves,  as  it  is  faid,  Citizens  of  the  United  States  of  Ame- 
rica. It  is  alfo  further  afferted,  that  they  do  it  by  your  in- 
ftigation,  and  that  they  have  in  their  pofleiTion  a  paper  in  which 
you  give  authority  to  them  in  their  rebellious  defigns,  and  by 
which  you  promife  them  your  proteclion  and  to  furnifh  them 
the  means  of  putting  them  into  execution. 

I  cannot  perfuade  my fe If  that  you  would  act  in  fo  unlawful 
a  manner  as  to  be  the  promoter  and  an  active  party  in  an  in- 
furre6lion  which  will  inevitably  terminate  i?i  ?.  n:pture  between 
the  two  nations  and  the  total  ruin  of  this  diilri£l  and  its  inha- 
bitants :  Wherefore  I  pray  you  to  inform  me  pofitively  whe- 
ther fuch  is,  or  is  not,  your  intention,  in  order  that  I  may  no- 
tify it  to  the  Commandant  General  of  this  Province,  that  it 
may  be  communicated  to  his  Majefty.  And  if  you  perlift  in 
the  fame  opinion,  from  this  moment  I  proteft  folemnly  in  the 
name  of  my  faid  Commandant  General,  againft  a  conducl  fo 
irregular,  making  you  reiponfible  for  the  fatal  confequences, 
which  rnay  flow  from  it. 

I  repeat  the  requeft  to  you  to  give  me  a  catagorical  anfwer 
on  this  fubject.,  and  I  have  the  honor  to  be  with  consideration, 

Sir,  your  molt  obedient  fervant, 

MANUEL  GAYOSO  de  LEMOS. 
Natchez^  i^th  June  1797. 

[  No.  3.  A.   ] 
Lieutenant  Pope,  to  Governor  Gayofo. 

Camp  at  the  Natchez,   i^th  June,  1797. 
S  I  R, 

I  HAVE  received  your  letter  of  this  date,  in  anfwer  to  which 
I  muft  avail  myfelf  of  anterior  occurrences.  Shortly  after  my 
arrival  here,  did  you  not  pofitively  give  it  to  be  underflood^T 


that  you  intended  to  evacuate  this  poft,  as  being  within  the 
territory  of  the  United  States  ?  In  attending  to  your  firft  cor- 
refpondence,  I  p  re  fume  you  cannot  impute  to  me  the  charge 
of  inconHftency  and  impropriety.  If  your  governmeat  feels 
the  necefiity  of  breaking  its  engagements,  and  if  on  this  very 
account  the  people  become  irritated  a^ainft  it,  as  I  have  not 
been  the  firfl  promoter  of  the  deceit,  fo  1  am  as  little  refponfi- 
ble  for  the  event.  I  confider  myfelf  as  the  perfon  appointed 
by  my  government  to  take  pofletfion  of  the  poit  of  the  Natchez : 
you  admitted  it  in  the  beginning,  and  I  confequently  have  a 
right  to  fuftairi  it.  It  is  not  furprizing  that  the  citizens  of  the 
United  States  have  chofen  me  to  defend  their  right.  After 
reflecting  maturely  upon  every  part  of  the  queftion,  it  is  fur- 
prizing,  that  you  Ihould  yet  confider  the  people  of  the  Natchez 
as  fubje&s  of  his  Catholic  Majefty.  But  you  appear  to  me  to 
requdt  that  I  mould  give  you  pofitive  anfwers  to  general 
queftions. 

Have  you  endeavoured  to  inftigate  the  people  of  this  country 
to  act  hoftily  againft  the  interefts'of  his  Catholic  Majefty  ? 

Have  you  ftirred  up  the  people  to  take  the  fort  ?  Or  have 
you  moved  or  incited  them  to  other  hoftile  objects? 

To  each  of  thefe  queftions  I  anfwer  pofitively,  no:  but  as 
commandant  of  the  troops  of  the  United  States  at,  the  lower 
pofts,  I  muft  allure  you,  that  the  landing  of  any  troops  or  the 
repairing  of  the  fortifications  of  the  territory  in  queftion,  will 
be  confidered  as  an  attack  upon  the  dignity  and  the  honor  of 
my  country,  and  I  mall  conceive  myfelf  bound  by  duty  to  a6l 
conformably  to  my  prefent  fentiments.  I  cannot  neverthe- 
lefs,  as  far  as  refpedts  myfelf,  omit  informing  you,  that  any 
agreement  upon  juit  principles  will  meet  my  approbation. 

")  Commandant  of  the  troops 

PIERCY  SMITH  POPE,  I     of  the  United  States  on 

J       the  Millifippi. 

Senor  Don  Manuel  Gayofo  de  Lemos. 

[  No.  5.  A.  ] 
Copy  of  a  paper  which  was  circulated. 

WE  the  fubfcribers  have  no  knowledge  of  our  Country  be- 
ing now  at  war  ;  but  from  the  hoftile  preparations,  which  the 
Officers  of  H.  C.  M.  are  making  in  thefe  parts  we  are  in- 
duced to  believe,  that  war  is  not  very  cliflant,  and  until  the 
Commencement  of  hoftiliiies  againit  the  United  States,  thofe 


74- 

ivho  confider  themfelves  Citizens  thereof  will  re  fpecl  all  def- 
criptions  of  perfons  and  things. 


ANDREW  ELLICOTT,}  C™"S™r,  °f  the 

>  Commandant  of  the  troops 
PIERCY  SMITH  POPE,  I     of  the  United  States  on. 

J      the  Miflifippi. 
Natchez,   i^th  June,   1/97. 


(No.   16.) 

(TRANSLATION.) 

From  the  Chevalier  de  Trujo,  to  the  Secretary  of  Stale. 

S  I  R, 

ALTHO'  the  anfwer  which  you  gave  to  the  letter  I  had 
the  honor  of  writing  to  you  on  the  6th  of  May  lad,  excited  in 
me  all  the  obfervations  which  I  fhall  now  prefent  to  you  in 
this,  wiming  upon  the  whole,  that  the  interefts  of  America 
would  induce  its  Adminiftration  to  adopt  the  conciliatory  mode 
which  I  propofed  to  you,  that  of  giving  to  the  American  Ple- 
nipotentiaries going  to  Paris,  the  neceflary  inftru&ions  for  ad- 
jufting  the  differences  with  Spain,  I  at  that  time  abftained  from 
entering  into  a  reply ;  which  although  well  founded,  might 
not  perhaps  contribute  fo  much  to  the  good  intelligence  be- 
tween Spain  and  the  United  States,  as  the  idea  which  I  then 
fuggefted  to  you,  and  have  juft  now  mentioned.  The  lively 
jdefire  which  I  have  had  and  ftill  have,  not  to  fee  interrupted 
the  harmony  between  thefe  two  nations,  has  caufed  me  to  view 
with  regret  after  feveral  weeks  filence  your  difappointment  in 
fuppofing  that  the  reafons  upon  which  your  anfwer  is  founded 
were  fufficient  to  convince  his  Catholic  Majefty  of  the  impar- 
tiality and  good  faith  of  the  United  States  on  this  point.  My 
fufpicions  have  been  verified,  and  your  expectations  are  en- 
tirely fruftrated  by  the  late  orders  which  I  have  juft  received 
from  the  King  my  Mafter. 

His  Catholic  Majefty  has  not  obferved  in  the  faid  anfwer 
from  you,  any  reafon  to  induce  him  to  change  his  opinion 
concerning  the  injuries  refulting  to  his  fubje6t.s  from  the  fti- 
pulatipns  of  the  Englifh  Treaty,  compared  with  thofe  of  the 
Treaty  with  Spain,  as  well  on  the  fubjecT:  of  the  Articles  of 
contraband,  as  on  the  principle  adopted  in  ours  "  That  frre 
mips  ihould  make  free  goods,  &c." 


75- 

But  what  has  moil  aftoniihcd  his  Majefly  and  confirmed 
him  in  the  juftice  of  his  pretenfions,  is  what  you  have  faid  in 
your  anfwer  with  regard  to  the  navigation  of  the  Miflifippi. 
I  am  ordered,  therefore,  on  a  review  of  the  whole,  to  make 
to  this  government,  thro'  you,  the  following  obfervations. 

When  the  Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Jefferfon,  on  the  I  ^th 
of  May  1793,  wrote  to  Mr.  Ternant,  then  the  Minifter  Ple- 
nipotentiary of  France,  reclaiming  the  Englifh  fhip  Grange, 
captured  at  the  mouth  of  the  River  Delaware,  by  the  Frigate 
L'  Ambufcade,  belonging  to  the  Republic,  he  accompanied 
his  letter  with  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Randolph,  Attorney  Gene- 
ral of  the  United  States,  in  which  the  right  of  reclamation  v,  as 
among  other  reafons  founded  on  the  following. 

"  That  the  whole  of  its  defcent  to  the  Atlantic  Ocean  is 
•covered  on  each  fide  by  the  territory  of  the  United  States : 
That  from  tide-water  to  the  diftance  of  about  fixty  miles  from 
the  Atlantic  Ocean,  it  is  called  the  river  Delaware. 

"  That  its  mouth  is  formed  by  the  Capes  Henlopen  and 
May ;  the  former  belonging  to  the  State  of  Delaware  in  proper- 
ty and  jurifdicHbn  ;  the  latter  to  the  State  of  New-Jerfcy. 

"  That  the  Delaware  does  not  lead  from  the  fea  to  the  domi- 
nions of  any  foreign  nation. 

"  The  corner-ftone  of  our  claim  h,  that  the  United  States  are 
proprietors  of  the  lands  on  both  fides  of  the  Delaware,  from 
its  head  to  its  entrance  into  the  fea. 

"  A  River  confide  red  merely  as  fuch,  is  ike  property  of  the  peopl 
through  whofe  lands  it  flows,  or  of  him  under  luboje  jurljditiim  that 
people  is"  Grot.  b.  2.  c.  2.  §.  12. 

"  Rivers  might  be  held  in  property,  though  ;/.•  ;//vr  whtft  they  rift; 
nor  where  they  dif charge  themfehes  be  within  our  territory,  but  they 
join  both,  or  the  fea..  It  isfufficient  for  us  that  the  larger  part  of 
zvater,  that  is,  the  fides,  isflmt  up  In  our  banks,  and  that  the  river 
in  refpecJ  of  our  land,  is  iff  elf f mall  and  infignifcant.  Grot.  b.  2. 
c.  3.  §.  7.  And  Barbegroe*  in  his  note  fubjoins  that  neither 
of  thofe  is  necefiary. 

"  Rivers  may  be  the  property  of  whole  States.  Puff.  b.  2.  c.  3.  §. 
4.  To  render  a  thing  capable  of  being  appropriated,  it  is  not  JlriElly 
neceffary  that  we  fhould enclofe,  or  be  able  to  enckfe  it  within  artificial 
bounds,  or  fuch  as  are  different  from  its  own  jubjlance  ;  itisfuffi- 
cient  if  the  compafs  and  extent  of  it  can  be  any  way  determined.  And 
therefore  Grotius  bath  given  hlmfelf  a  needlefs  trouble,  when,  to 
prove  rivers  capable  of  property,  he  ufeth  this  argument ,  that  although 
they  are  bounded  by  the  land  at  neither  end,  but  united  to  the  other 
rivers  or  the  fea,  yet  it  is  enough,  that  the  greater  part  of  them,  that 
/V,  their  fides,  are  enclofed.  Puff.  b.  4.  c.  5.  §.  3. 
[*  Meaning  Barbeyrac.  3 


<{  When  a  nation  takes pffiffion  <fa  country,  in  crd:r  i~  fettle  there, 
it  pcjj'ifjes  every  thing  included  in  it,  as  lands ,  lakes,  rivers.  Vat- 
tel,  b.  i.  c.  22.  §.  266. 

"  Congrcfs  too  have  afied  on  thefe  ideas,  when,  in  their  collec- 
tion of  laws,  they  afcribe  to  a  ilate  the  rivers  wholly  within 
that  State. 

"  The  gulphs  and  channels,  cr  arms  cfthefea,  are,  according  to 
the  regular  courfe,  fupp-fed  to  belong  to  the  people  zvith  whofe  lands 
they  are  cncompoffed.  PufF.  b.  4.  c.  5.  §.  8. 

"  Thefe  remarks  may  be  enforced  by  afking  what  nation 
can  be  injured  in  its  rights,  by  the  Delaware  being  appropriated 
to  the  United  States?  And  to  what  degree  may  not  the  United 
States  be  injured,  on  the  contrary  ground?  It  communicates 
with  no  foreign  dominion." 

What  a  multitude  of  confequences  may  be  drawn  from  the 
application  of  thefe  principles,  eftablifhed  by  the  American  ad- 
minirtration  four  years  ago,  with  regard  to  the  navigation  of 
the  Miflifipi !  The  powerful  arms  held  therein  by  Spain  for 
obitrufting  this  navigation,  her  not  having  made  ufe  of  them, 
and  her  having  infifted  in  a  manner  fo  explicit  and  pofitive 
that  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  alone  fhould  have  a  rigjht  to 
the  advantages  of  this  river,  are  a  convincing  and  incontestable 
proof  of  the  good  faith  and  upright  intentions  of  Spain.  But 
the  privilege  of  the  Citizens  of  the  United  States  to  navigate 
the  faid  river  to  the  ocean,  not  being  now  doubted — let  us  quit 
this  point  in  order  to  treat  alone  of  that  which  regards  the  right 
acknowledged  to  England  by  the  American  Administration,  for 
the  enjoyment  of  its  advantages. 

What  does  Spain  wifh  or  defire  r  That  the  American  Citizens 
al-int,  of  all  the  foreign  nations,  fhould  enjoy  the  privilege  of 
this  navigation.  What  does  the  American  Adminiftration  wifh 
or  de fire?  That  it  Jhould  not  le  the  American  Citizens  alone,  who 
fhould  reap  the  advantages  of  it.  From  this  difference  of  pre- 
tenfions,  it  would  appear  that  Spain  defends  the  interefts  of 
America  more  than  the  adminiftration  itfelf. 

You  fay  in  your  arifwer  to  me  of  the  lyth  of  May,  "  But 
I  might  deny  that  the  United  States  ever  granted  the  right  of 
navigating  the  MiiFifippi,  to  Great-Britain.  A  recurrence  to 
the  treaties  to  which  you  refer,  will  prove  that  ihe  pofTerTed 
that  right  b^  the  peace  of  1763;  and  that  fhe  has  never  for- 
mally relinquished  it."  In  another  paragraph  of  the  fame  let- 
ter you  add,  "  By  the  defini'ive  treaty  of  peace  concluded  the 
3d  of  September  1783,  the  latter  ceded  to  Spain  Eafr-Florida  ; 
as  alfo  Weft-Florida  :  But  the  river  Miffifippi,  as  you  cbferve, 
is  not  even  mentioned  in  the  treaty.  What  is  the  juft  infer- 
ence from  this  circumflance  the  United  States  need  not  decide. 


77- 

Doubtlefs  Great-Britain  conceived  it  important  to  hold  a 
right  to  the  navigation  of  it,  and  all  parties  at  that  time  certain- 
ly fuppofed  that  parts  of  her  territories  joined  its  eaflern  fide, 
and  probably  no  one  can  now  fay  they  do  not." 

If  it  be  certain  that  the  United  States  never  have  granted 
to  England  the  right  of  navigating  the  Miflifippi,  to  the  Ocean, 
it  is  notwithftanding  very  evident  that  they  have  acknowledged  it 
with  every  fdemnity,  as  appears  by  the  treaty  of  1783,  by  that 
of  Commerce,  and  laftly  by  the  explanatory  article  iigned  on 
the  4th  of  May  1796.  How  then  could  you  fay  to  me  "  What 
is  the  juft  inference  from  this  circumftance,  the  United  States 
need  not  decide  ?"  Have  they  not  decided  as  pofitively  as  fa- 
vorably for  England  by  acknowledging  the  claim  to  an  unjuft 
right  ?  Which  of  the  principles  eftablifhed  by  the  officers  of 
the  administration,  in  relation  to  the  Delaware,  in  the  cafe  of 
the  (hip  Grange,  will  apply  to  England  in  relation  to  the 
Miflifippi  r  For  inftance,  is  its  fource  in  the  Britifh  domini- 
ons? Does  it  run  through  their  provinces  or  difcharge  itfelf  in 
their  poffeflions  r  But  you  fay  that  when  by  the  Treaty  of 
1783,  England  ceded  to  Spain  Eall  and  Weft  Elcrida,  (he  did 
not  make  mention  of  the  Miffifippi,  but  the  Attorney  General 
of  the  United  States  eftablifhed  in  the  cafe  of  the  Grange  the 
principle  of  Vattel.  That  "  when  a  nation  takes  pvffeffiw  of  a 
country,  in  order  to  fettle  there,  it  poffeffes  every  thing  included  ,'• 
as  lands,  lakes,  rivers,"  of  courfe  when  Great-Britain  cc;L-d 
Eaft  and  Weft  Florida,  (he  likewife  ceded  the  lands,  lakes  and 
rivers,  the  right  of  which  Hie  might  have  held  in  the  faid  pof- 
feflions. By  the  principle  cilablimed  by  you  that  [he  had  not 
exprefsiy  renounced  it,  having  made  no  mention  of  the  rivers 
Apalachicola,  Mobile  or  Alabama,  and  others,  the  United 
States  might  believe  themfelves  in  like  manner  authorized  to 
recognize  the  navigation  in  favor  of  England,  becaufe  they  are 
not  mentioned  in  the  Treaty.  France  alfo  might  claim  the 
navigation  of  the  Miffilippi,  fince  in  the  a&  of  ceilion  to  Spain 
of  New-Orleans,  me  did  not  exprefjy  renounce  the  navigation 
of  this  River.  By  this  fame  principle  the  United  States  might 
fuppofe  themfelves  authorized  to  recognize  to  France  the  right 
of  navigating  the  river  St.  Laurence.  The  cafe  is  abfolutely 
fimilar.  France  does  not  hold  an  inch  of  land  on  its  borders, 
England  does  not  po  fiefs  a  thumb's  breadth  on  thofe  of  the 
Miliifippi.  The  river  St.  Laurence  neither  has  its  fource,: 
runs  through,  nor  empties  in  the  polleflions  of  France.  The 
Miflifippi  neither  has  its  origin,  runs  through,  nor  empties  in 
the  dominions  of  England.  France  once  had  the  right  of .  na- 
,JSrigating  the  river  St.  Laurence,  becaufe  flic  had  poifeflions  on' 
its  borders.  England  alfo  once  enjoyed  the  right  to  the  navi- 


Cation  of  tlie  Miilifippi,  becaufe  me  had  poflefTions  on  its  mar- 
gins.  In  the  ceffion  of  Canada  no  mention  is  made  of  the 
river  St.  Laurence,  altho'  it  fpeaks  of  lilands.  Nor  is  the 
Miffifippi  named  in  the  ceffion  of  the  Floridas:  the  cafe  then 
is  abfolutely  iimilar.  If  the  United  States,  although  they  did 
not  grant,  Should  acknowledge  to  France  the  right  of  navigating 
the  river  of  St.  Laurence,  would  not  England  with  infinite 
reafon  confider  herfelf  as  juftly  offended  ?  Why  therefore, 
when  the  United  States  acknowledge  to  England  a  right  as 
unjuft,  with  regard  to  Spain,  as  prejudicial  to  the  American 
Citizens,  fhould  not  Spain  look  upon  herfelf  as  offended  and 
infulted?  I  repeat  the  text  of  Vattel  "  When  a  nation  takes 
pcffcffion  of  a  country,  in  order  to  fettie  there,  it  pffiffes  every  thing 
included  in  it,  as  lands,  lakes,  rivers." 

Afterwards  touching  the  fubjeft  whether  the  poiTeiTions  bor- 
der on  the  Miififippi  or  not,  you  add  (f  and  probably  no  one  can 
now  fav  ib«.y  do  not"  I  can  allure  you  they  do  not.  The  late 
difcoveries  of  M'Kenzie,  and  the  beft  Map  that  has  hitherto 
been  publillied  of  North  America,  in  London,  about  eighteen 
months  ago,  by  A.  Arrowfmith,  evidence  that  the  true  origin 
of  the  Miififippi  is  in  White  Bear  Lake,  and  that  from  that 
point  its  waters  do  not  touch  any  Englifh  territory.  If  other 
teftimony  were  neceiiary  I  ihould  not  feek  it  abroad  :  at  Mil- 
ford  in  Connecticut,  there  now  lives  Mr.  Peter  Pond,  who  has 
been  employed  17  years  in  the  fervice  of  the  Hudfon  Company, 
has  parTed  over  and  examined  all  thofe  regions  ;  has  been  at  the 
fame  origin  of  the  Miilifippi,  that  is  at  IVhite  Bear  Lake,  and 
has  formed  a  valuable  Map,  which  he  now  preferves  in  ma- 
nufcript,  and  which  confirms  that  the  Englifh  have  not  a  foot  of 
land  on  the  borders  of  the  Miflifippi. 

Having  therefore,  in  my  opinion,  completely  confuted  the 
moil  effential  part  of  the  anfwer  which  you  gave  to  my  faid 
letter  of  the  6th  May,  and  having  proved  to  demonftration  the 
juft  motives  which  his  Catholic  Majefty  has  for  being  offended 
with  the  explanatory  article  iigned  by  you  and  Mr.  Bond,  on  the 
4th  of  May  1 796,  it  only  remains  for  me  to  afk  you  in  the  name 
of  the  King  my  Matter,  whether  the  United  States  contemplate, 
or  not,  the  performance  of  the  above  mentioned  Treaty,  in  this 
particular. 

I  tender  you  my  fervices,  and  hope  that  the  Lord  may  pre- 
ferve  you  many  years. 

Your  moft  obedient  fervant, 
CARLOS  MARTINEZ  de  YRUJO. 

Philadelphia,   2T/?  Nov.  1797. 
Timothy  Pickering,  Efquirel 
Secretary  of  State.          f. 


79- 

(No.   17.) 

For  the  AURORA. 

To  the  NATIVE  AMERICAN. 

THE  punctuality  with  which  I  have  anfwered  the  letters 
you  adclrefled  to  the  Chevalier  deYrujo,  and  the  defence  you 
have  taken  on  ycurfclf  as  well  of  Mr.  Pickering  as  of  the  inte- 
refts  of  Great-Britain,  authorize  me  in  dire6ting  this  letter  to 
you,  and  impofes  on  you  the  obligation  of  anfwering  it.  Pre- 
vious to  my  entering  on  the  principal  object  of  it,  permit  me, 
Sir,  to  make  a  few  obfervations. 

Since  our  correfpondence  has  ceafed,  the  King  of  Great- 
Britain  and  his  Council  have  declared,  that  they  Jhould  not  corji- 
der  in  England,  as  American  Citizens,  thofe,  -who  have  been  natu- 
ralized fmce  the  acknowledgment  of  our  Independence.  This  tyrani- 
cal  declaration,  contrary  to  all  the  principles  of  natural  right, 
acknowledged  by  the  firft  publicists,  which,  as  it  injures  a 
great  number  of  individuals  in  this- country  and  wounds  at  the 
fame  time  the  facred  right  of  its  Sovereignty,  I  expected  would 
have  excited  in  you,  Sir,  that  fervent  zeal  with  which  you  have 
appeared  to  defend  the  intereit  of  the  United  States  in  the  dif- 
pute  refpe6ting  the  delivery  of  the  pofts  and  the  line  of  demarca- 
tion with  the  Spaniards.  From  whence  then  arifesthis  filence^ 
Are  you  ignorant  of  the  effects  of  this  determination  which  ex- 
tends the  oppreflion  of  Great-Britain  to  the  very  wilds  of  Ame- 
rica ?  Can  you  be  ignorant  that  the  three-fifths  of  that  active  and 
valuable  clafs  of  citizens  which  export  the  products  of  the  coun- 
try, equip  the  mips  which  carry  the  American  flag  to  the  ex- 
tremeties  of  the  earth,  and  which  fupports  our  nmeries,  in  the 
perfect  confidence  and  fecurhy  of  being  protected  by  that  go- 
vernment to  whom  they  have  fworn  allegiance,  are  thereby 
entirely  thrown  on  the  mercy  of  England  ?  And  do  you  not 
forefee  that  its  immediate  confequence  Is  authorizing  the  Britilh 
fhips  of  war  hereafter  to  feize  the  crews  of  our  vefTeis  under  the 
appearance  of  a  right  ?  Where  then  is  this  zeal  of  yours  which 
reibunded  in  every  Gazette,  when  the  fubject  in  queftion 
was  merely  a  momentary  fufpenfion  of  apart  of  the  treaty  with 
Spain,  although  this  nation  had  the  mod  powerful  motives  for 
fo  doing  ?  What  is  become  of  the  phalanx  of  fcribblers,  at 
whofe  head  you  appeared,  with  FEN  NO  and  the  mighty  POR- 
CUPINE to  defend  vigouroufly  the  rights  of  America?  Surely 
neither  you  nor  any  other  perfon  whatever  will  pretend  to  deny 


8o. 

or  even  exprefs  a  doubt,  that  the  above  mentioned  declaration 
of  the  Briiifh,  monarch  does  not  violate  them  in  a  moft  unjuft 
and  hoftile  manner  ?  From  whence  then  fo  much  noife  and  cla- 
mour when  treating  of  the  affairs  in  difpute  with  Spain  ?  And 
from  whence  arifes  *hat  fervile  filence,  in  a  Native  American 
when  the  queftion  is  to  defend  his  country  againft  the  tyranny 
of  England  ?  This  difference  of  conduct  confirms  my  fufpicions 
of  your  being  a  mere  Britiih  hireling,  who  has  alfumed  a  re- 
fpeclable  title  in  order  the  more  eafily  to  deceive  the  good  faith 
and  candor  of  your  readers  \  but  fortunately  you  have  completely 
unmafkcd  yourfelf,  and  the  public  may  now  judge  the  decree 
of  faith  and  confidence  to  be  placed  in  your  productions.  But 
to  return  to  the  affairs  of  Spain. 

In  my  former  letters  I  think  I  evidently  proved  the  injuftice 
of  your  attacks  againft  Spain  and  its  minifters:  I  think  I  have 
fufficiently  fhewn  that  the  projects  of  Bloimt,  and  the  intended 
expedition  of  the  Englifh  againft  the  poflTeiiions  of  his  Catholic 
Majefty,  have  juftified  the  retention  of  the  ports,  as  the  moft 
imminent  danger  might  have  arifen  by  their  delivery.  I  ihali 
now  endeavor  to  give  frefn  proots  of  our  adminiftration's  not 
acting  towards  Spain  with  that  equity,  juftice  and  honour 
which  a  found  policy  requires,  and  which  certainly  appertains 
to  a  nation  that  calls  itfelf  neutral,  and  affecls  to  be  ftricllv 
fo. 

Ever  fince  exterior  commerce  and  navigation,  which  is  its 
confequence,  have  influenced  in  politics,  mercantile  connexi- 
ons have  been  confidered  the  links  which  unite  moft  one  nation 
with  another.  Thefe  mercantile  relations  confift  in  mutual 
wants  and  reciprocal  means  of  Satisfying  them.  From  fuch 
evident  principles  it  refults  that  there  exifts  few  nations  which 
would  and  ought  to  eftablifh  a  more  intimate  connexion  than 
the  United  States  and  Spain.  Our  flour,  plank,1  timber,  pitch 
and  the  articles  of  fait  provifions,  can  always  find  a  fure  and 
advantageous  market  in  his  Catholic  Majefty 's  dominions  both 
in  Europe  and  America;  on  the  other  hand,  the  wines,  bran- 
dies, oil,  and  fruits  of  Spain,  the  coffee  and  fugar  of  her  colo- 
nies are  articles  we  are  in  want  of.  Behold  here  the  bafis 
of  a  perfe6t  union  and  friendfhip  which  \vould  open  an  exten- 
five  field  for  fpeculation  with  mutual  advantage.  His  Catholic 
Majefty  made  the  firft  ftep  towards  this  union,  by  concluding 
with  the  United  States  a  very  liberal  treaty  eftablifhed  on  the 
principles  of  found  policy,  and  when  we  ought  to  have  expect- 
ed that  our  admin  if  I:  ration  would  endeavour  to  tighten  the  bands 
of  friendfhip  with  a  nation  from  whom  fo  many  advantages 
would  have  accrued,  itfignedon  the  4th  of -May,  1796,  only  a 
few  months  after  concluding  a  treaty  with  Spain,  an  explanatory  ' 


article  to  that  part  of  the  Englim  treaty  which  regards  the  na- 
vigation of  the  Miilifippi,  acknowledging  to  the  Englifh  aright 
to  the  faid  navigation.  In  order  to  convince  every  impartial 
American  of  the  injuftice  of  this  proceeding-,  I  {hall  not  feek  in 
any  foreign  text  for  arguments  on  which  to  ground  mine. 
The  principles  eftablifhed  by  the  officers  of  the  United  States, 
three  or  four  years  ago  will  be  the  bafis  of  my  obfervations. 

When  the  Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  JefFerfon,  wrote  on  the 
1 5th  of  May,  1793,  to  M.  de  Ternant,  then  miniiter  plenipo- 
tentiary of  France,  claiming  the  British  fhip  Grange,  taken 
at  the  entrance  of  the  Delaware,  by  the  French  frigate  1'Am- 
bufcade,  he  communicated  to  him  the  opinion  of  the  Attorney- 
General  of  the  United  States,  in  which,  among  others,  he 
founded  his  claim  on  the  following  reafons  : 

"  That  the  whole  of  its  defcent  (the  river  Delaware)  to  the 
Atlantic  Ocean,  is  covered  on  each  fide  by  territory  of  the  Uni- 
ted States : 

"  That  from  tide-water  to  the  diftance  of  about  fixty  miles 
from  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  it  is  called  the  river  Delaware  : 

"  That  its  mouth  is  formed  by  the  Capes  Henlopen  and  May ; 
the  former  belonging  to  the  State  of  Delaware  in  property 
and  jurifdi&ion,  the  latter  to  the  State  of  New-Jerfey. 

*  *  That  the  Delaware  does  not  lead  from  the  fea  to  the  domi- 
nions of  any  foreign  nation. 

"  The  corner  ftone  of  our  claim  is,  that  the  United  States 
are  proprietors  of  the  land  on  both  fides  of  the  Delaware,  from 
its  head  to  its  entrance  into  the  fea. 

t{  A  river  conftdered  merely  as  fuch,  is  the  property  of  the  people 
through  whofe  lands  It  flows,  or  of  him  under  whofe  jurifdlcllon  that 
people  is.  Grot.  b.  2.  c.  2.  §.  12. 

"  Rivers  might  be  held  in  property  ;  though  neither  where  they  rife 
nor  where  they  dif charge  themf elves  be  within  our  territory,  but  they 
join  to  both,  or  the  fea.  It  Is  fufficient  for  us  that  the  larger  part  of 
zvater,  that  is  thejides,  is  Jhut  up  in  our  banks,  and  that  the  river, 
In  refpeff  of  our  land,  is  iff  elf f mall  and  Injlgnlficant.  Grot.  b.  2. 
c.  3.  §  7.  and  Barobegre  in  his  note  fubjoins  that  neither  of  thofe 
is  neceflTary. 

"  Rivers  may  be  the  property  of  whole  States.     Puff.  b.  3.  c.   3. 

§  4- 

"  To  render  a  thing  capable  cf  being  appropriated,  it  is  notftrlttly 
neceffary  that  we  Jhould  enchfe  it,  or  be  able  to  er.clofe  within  artificial 
bounds,   or  fuch  as  are  different  from  its  civnfubftance,  It  Is  fufficient 
If  the  compajs  and  extent  of  it  can  be  any  way  determined.     And  there- 
fore Grotius  has  given  hlmfelf  a  needlefs  trouble,  when  to  prove  rl- 
jvet  s  capable  of  property,  he  ujeth  this  argument,  that  although  the\ 
'are  bounded  by  the  land  at  neither  end}  but  united  to  the  other  rivers 

L 


or  thefea,  yet  it  is  enough,  that  the  greater  part  of  them,  that  is  their- 
Jides,  are  enckfed.     Puff,  b.  4.   c.   5.   §  3. 

"  When  a  nation  takes  pofj'tffion  of  a  country,  in  order  to  fettle  there  y 
it  poffeffes  every  thing  included  in  if,  as  lands,  lakes,  rivers.  Vattel, 
b.  i.  c.  22.  §  266. 

ft  Congrefs  too  have  a&edon  thefe  ideas,  when,  in  their  col- 
lection of  laws,  they  afcribe  to  a  ftate  the  rivers  wholly  within 
that  State. 

"  The  guJphs  and  channels,  or  arms  of  thefca,  are,  according  to 
the  regular  courfe,  fuppojcd  to  belong  to  the  people  with  whcfe  lands 
they  are  encompajjed.  Puff.  b.  4.  0.5.  §8. 

"  Thefe  remarks  may  be  enforced  by  aflung,  what  nation 
can  be  injured  in  its  rights,  by  the  Delaware  being  appro- 
priated to  the  United  States  ?  And  to  what  degree  may  not  the 
United  States  be  injured,  on  the  contrary  ground  ?  It  commu- 
nicates writh  no  foreign  dominion." 

Now,  Mr.  Native  American,  what  a  multitude  of  confe- 
quenees  could  we  not  draw  by  an  application  of  thefe  princi- 
ples (eftablifhed  by  our  adrniniftration  four  years  ago,)  to  the 
Subject  refpeding  the  navigation  of  the  Miliifippi  !  What 
powerful  arms  was  it  not  in  the  hands  of  Spain  to  have  refufed 
us  this  navigation  !  Not  to  have  made  ufe  of  them  and  her 
infifting,  in  an  explicit  and  pofitive  manner,  that  the  citizens 
alone  cf  the  United  States  fhould  have  a  right  to  the  advantages 
of  this  river,  evidently  proves  her  good  taith  and  found  inten- 
f  ions.  But  as  the  right  which  the  Americans  have  to  navigate 
t'his  river,  to  the  very  ocean,  is  no  longer  doubtful,  let  us  quit 
this  topic  and  treat  only  of  that  with  refpect  to  the  right  ac- 
knowledged, by  our  adminiftration,  in  favour  of  England  to 
thefe  advantages. 

What  does  Spain  wifh  for,  or  defire  ?  that,  of  all  foreign  na- 
tions, the  Americans  alone  mould  enjoy  the  privilege  of  this  na- 
vigation. And  what  is  the  wifh  and  delire  of  our  adminiftra- 
tion ?  That  the  citizens  of  America  Jhouldnot  be  the  only  people 
to  enjoy  its  advantages.  From  this  it  evidently  refults,  that 
the  King  of  Spain  is  the  defender  of  the  interefts  of  America, 
and  that  our  adminiftration  inftead  of  promoting  it,  has  meanly 
facrificed  it  to  England.  Impartial  Americans,  who  love  your 
country,  with  more  fincerity  than  the  Native  American  to  whom 
I  addrefs  this  letter,  let  your  attention  reft  a  while  on  the  pre- 
fent  fubjecl,  and  you  will  evidently  fee  I  do  not  exaggerate, 
when  I  tell  you,  that  in  this  refpecl:  our  adminiftration  has 
bafely  facrificed  our  advantages  by  their  unjuft  partiality  to 
Great-Britain.  In  order  to  make  this  more  evident,  examine 
the  anfwer  given  by  Mr.  Pickering  on  the  ryth  of  May  to  the 
Chevalier  de  Yrujo's  letter  of  the  6th  of  the  fame  month  ;  in 


it  you  will  fee,  thai  the  Secretary  of  State  of  a  neutral  nation, 
precifely  in  a  moment  when  hi*  administration  is  taxed  of  being 
unjuftly  partial  to  England,  inftead  of  effacing  this  impreffion 
by  a  line  of  conduct  ftriclly  neutral,  takes  upon  himfelf  to  de- 
fend the  caufe  and  interefts  of  Great-Britain.  Mr.  Pickering, 
attacked  by  the  ftrength  of  the  Chevalier  de  Yrujo's  argu- 
ments, fays,  "  But  I  might  deny  that  the  United  States  ever 
granted  the  right  of  navigating  the  Mifiifippi  to  Great-Britain, 
a  recurrence  to  the  treaties  to  which  you  refer,  will  prove  that 
fhe  poffeiTed  that  right  by  the  peace  of  1763;  and  that  fhe  has 
never  formally  relinquijhed  it."  In  another  paragraph  of  the 
fame  letter  he  fays  "  By  the  definitive  treaty  of  peace  betv/ecii 
Spain  and  Great-Britain  in  1783,  the  latter  ceded  to  Spain  Eaft 
Florida,  as  alfo  Weft  Florida  ;  but  the  river  Miffifippi,  as  you 
obferve,  is  not  even  mentioned  in  the  treaty.  What  is  the  juft 
inference  from  this  circumftance  the  United  States  need  not 
decide.  Doubtlefs  Great-Britain  conceives  it  important  to  hold 
a  right  to  the  navigation  of  it,  and  all  parties  at  that  time  cer- 
tainly fuppofed  that  parts  of  her  territories  joined  its  eaflern 
fide;  and  probably  no  one  can  now  fay  they  do  not."  Mr. 
Native  American,  if  it  be  true  that  the  United  States  never 
granted  the  right  of  navigating  the  Miflifippi  as  far  as  the  ocean, 
to  Great  Britain,  can  you  or  any  other  perfon  who  knows  how 
to  read,  pretend  to  deny  that  if  they  did  not  grant  it,  they  fe- 
hmnly  acknowledged  it,  as  appears  by  the  treaty  of  1783,  the 
unfortunate  treaty  of  Commerce,  and  laftly  by  the  explana- 
tory article,  figned  the  4th  of  May,  1796?  How  then  can 
Mr.  Pickering  p  re  fume  to  fay,  "  what  is  the  juft  inference 
from  this  circumftance  the  United  States  need  not  decide," 
has  it  not  been  pofitively  decided  in  favor  of  Great-Britain  by 
acknowledging  and  confirming  an  unjuft  right  thereto  ?  Which 
of  the  principles  eftabliihed  by  the  officers  of  Government  re- 
fpecling  the  Delaware  in  the  affair  of  the  Grange,  can  be  ap- 
plied to  England,  with  refpecl  to  the  MiiTifippir  Does  if. 
take  its  rife  in  her  dominions  ;  does  it  run  through  the  territo- 
ries, or  does  it  empty  itlelf  in  her  poffeflions?  However,  Mr. 
Pickering  fays  that,  when  by  the  definitive  treaty  of  peace  of 
1783,  England  ceded  Eaft  and  Weft  Florida,  no  mention  was 
made  of  the  Miflifippi ;  Mr.  Native  American,  the  Attorney 
General  of  the  United  States  has  eftablifhed  the  principle  of 
Vattel,  that,  when  a  nation  takes  pojjefjion  of  a  country,  in  order  to 
fettle  there,  it  polff'ejffes  every  thing  included  in  it,  as  lands,  lakes,  and 
rivers ;  of  courfe  when  Great-Britain  ceded  Eaft  and  Weft 
Florida,  it  equally  ceded  the  lands,  Jakes,  and  rivers  to  which 
it  had  a  right  in  the  faid  provinces.  By  this  fame  principle  of 
.  Mr.  Pickering,  as  no  mention  was  made  of  the  rivers  Apala- 


84. 

chicola,  Mobile  or  Alabama,  and  others,  the  United  States 
might  with  as  much  propriety  fuppofe  themfelves  authorized 
to  recognize  a  right  to  their  navigation  in  favour  of  Great- 
Britain.  France  might  equally  claim  a  right  to  the  navigation 
of  the  Miflifippi,  as  in  the  acl:  of  ceding  New-Orleans  to  Spain, 
fhe  does  not  exprefrly  renounce  the  navigation  of  faid  river. 
On  the  very  fame  princip^  the  United  States  might  fuppofe 
themfelves  authorized  to  recognize  a  right  to  France  to  the  na- 
vigation of  the  river  St.  Laurence  :  the  cafe  is  identically  the 
fame,  France  has  not  an  inch  of  land  on  its  banks,  England 
hac  not  a  fpot  on  thofe  of  Miflifippi.  The  river  St.  Laurence 
neither  takes  its  rife,  nor  runs,  or  empties  itfelf  in  the  poflef- 
ilons  of  France  ;  the  Miflifippi  neither  rifes,  nor  runs,  or 
empties  rfclf  in  the  dominions  of  Great-Britain.  France  had 
once  a  right  to  the  navigation  of  the  river  St.  Laurence,  be- 
caufe  fhe  had  pofleflion?  on  its  banks:  England  likewife/^ 
once  a  right  to  the  navigation  of  the  Miflifippi,.  becaufe  fhe  had 
poflefilons  on  its  borders.  In  the  ceflion  of  Canada  no  men- 
tion is  made  of  the  river  St.  Laurence,  although  mention  is 
made  of  its  iflands :  in  the  ceflion  of  the  Floridas  no  mention 
is  likewife  made  of  the  Miflifippi  ;  thus  then,  I  repeat,  the 
cafe  is  identically  the  fame.  Now,  Mr.  Native  American,  if 
the  United  States  were  to  require  or  acknowledge,  although  they 
did  not  grant,  to  France  a  right  to  navigate  the  river  St.  Lau- 
rence, would  not  England,  with  great  reafon  be  highly  offend- 
ed ?  Would  fhe  not  look  upon  this  act  of  the  United  States  as 
an  outrage?  If  fo,  why  mould  not  Spain  look  upon  herfelf  as 
•grofsly  injured  by  the  acknowledgement  of  a  right  as  injuri- 
ous to  i he  fubje&s  of  Spain  as  it  is  to  the  citizens  of  America  r 
I  again  repeat  the  quotation  of  Vattel,  "  when  a  nation  takes 
poiTeflion  of  a  country,  in  order  to  fettle  there,  it  pofles  every 
thing  included  in  it,  as  lands,  lakes,  rivers."  Mr.  Pickering 
continuing  in  the  language  and  ftile  of  an  advocate  for  Great- 
Britain,  inftead  of  ufing  that  which  becomes  the  Secretary  of 
State  of  a  nation  which  calls  itfelf  neutral,  fpeaking  whether 
the  Englifh  poflefllons  touch  on  the  Miflifippi  or  not,  adds, 
*'  and  probably  no  one  can  now  fay  they  do  not."  I,  Mr. 

Native  American,  can   a  flu  re  you  they  do  net,  and  if  Mr.  P 

had  been  attentive  to  the  progrefs  of  Geography,  and  was  even 
acquainted,  as  it  is  his  duty,  at  leaft  with  that  of  his  own 
country,  he  would  know,  as  well  as  me,  that  they  do  not.  The 
laft  difcoveries  of  M'Kenzie,  and  the  Map  piiblifhedin  London 
1 8  months  ago,  by  Mr.  A.  Arrowfmith,  fully  prove  the  origin 
of  the  Miflifippi  to  be  in  the  White  Bear  Lake,  and  that  from 
this  point  itscourfe  does  not  run  through  any  Britifh  pofleflion. 
If  it  were  neceflary  to  produce  any  new  teftimony  in  addition  ' 


to  the  foregoing,  I  would  not  feek  it  among  .foreigners :  At 
Milford,  in  Connecticut,  there  actually  lives  a  Mr.  Peter  Pond, 
who  was  employed  17  years  in  the  fervice  of  the  Hudfon  Bay 
company  ;  he  has  gone  over  and  examined  particularly  all  thoie 
regions  ;  he  has  been  at  the  very  fource  of  the  Mifiifippi,  name- 
ly, the  White  Bear  Lake,  and  has  made  out  a  valuable  Map, 
which  he  yet  preferves  in  manufcript,  and  which  confirms  that 
the  Engliih  have  not  a  foot  of  land  on  the  MifTifippi.  With 
thefe  proofs,  Mr.  Native  American,  (notwithstanding  Mr.  Pic- 
kering's doubts,  which  are  perhaps  voluntary)  I  think  I  can 
fafely  allure  you,  they  do  not. 

Mr.  Native  American,  the  profperity  of  the  United  States  de- 
pends on  peace,  and  peace  on  a  ftrict  neutrality  ;  let  us  be  juft 
and  we  (hall  be  refpected.  Honefty  is  the  left  policy,  and  furely 
the  contents  of  my  former  letter,  as  well  as  thofe  of  the  prefent 
one,  evidently  prove  that  our  adminiftration  has  neither  acted 
with  juftice  or  honefty  towards  Spain.  The  clamours  refpect- 
ing  the  momentary  fufpenfion  of  the  leaft  erTential  part  of  the 
treaty,  have  been  incelfant,  when  in  reality,  at  the  very  mo- 
ment Spain  held  out  a  friendly  and  liberal  hand  to  us,  we  have 
repaid  this  act  of  generofity  with  ingratitude,  recognizing  to  her 
enemy  a  claim  to  a  pretended  and  unjujl  right.  The  friendfhip  of 
Spain  ought  to  be  dear  to  us,  as  from  a  good  underftandins; 
with  her  may  refult  a.  commercial  treaty,  which  would  at  the 
fame  time  vivify  and  fupply  her  colonies  and  open  an  extend ve 
field  for  the  profperity  of  our  navigation  and  commerce.  The 
unjuft  proceeding  of  the  adminiftration  is  not  furely  the  method 
of  obtaining  an  object:  we  ought  all  anxioufly  to  wifh  for.  If 
the  adminiftration  acts  with  juftice  and  equity  it  is  the  duty  of 
every  good  American  to  fupport  it  ;  but  I  obfervc  with  much 
regret  that  many  of  my  fellow-citizens,  daily  confound  the 
minifters,  or  the  admin  ijlration  with  government,  and  think  they 
fupport  the  latter,  when  in  fact  they  fupport  the  adminiftration. 
If  minifters,  animated  either  by  the  fpirit  of  party  or  by  other 
views,  proceed  in  their  meafures  with  injuftice,  it  is  necefiary  to 
attack  the  adminiftration  in  order  to  fupport  the  government ;  for  the 
adminiftration  can  in  many  inftances  be  as  much  the  enemy  of 
the  government  as  merchants  are  often  the  greateft  enemies  of 
commerce. 

I  hope,  Mr.  Native  American,  you  will  be  plea  fed  to  favor 
me  with  an  anfwer  on  the  different  points  Contained  in  this 
letter,  as  I  (hall  look  on  your  filence  to  be  an  implicit  con- 
feflion  of  the  impoftibility  you  find  therein.  Although  the 
various  fubjedts  contained  herein  are  fufceptible  of  greater  elu- 
cidation, I  have  adhered  folely  to  the  moft  prominent  points  in 


86. 


order  to  focilitpte  your  anfwer,  and  that  the  public  may  tho- 
roughly invefiigate  the  fubjecl:. 

V  E  R  U  S. 


(No.   18.) 

The  Secretary  of  State,  to  the  Chevalier  de  Trujo. 

Department  of  State,  Philadelphia,  Jan.  2oth,  1798. 
S  I  R, 

AS  your  letters  of  the  9th  of  October  and  2Tft  of  Novem- 
ber lad,  contained  no  new  matter  of  any  confequence,  and  a 
frefh  difcuflion  of  the  points  in  difpute  would  require,  on  my 
part,  only  a  recurrence  to  arguments  formerly  and  conclufively 
urged,  the  general  impreflion  on  my  mind  was,  that  it  would 
not  be  neceifary  to  give  them  a  formal  reply  ,  whatever  notice 
it  might  be  proper  to  take  of  them  in  a  report  to  the  Prefideni 
of  the  United  States.  Neverthelefs,  I  will  now  trouble  you 
with  a  few  observations. 

A  confederation  of  the  papers  heretofore  laid  before  Congrefr, 
relative  to  the  affairs  on  the  MifTIfippi,  of  others  fmce  received 
from  thence,  in  conjunction  vvith  your  letter  of  the  9th  of  Oc- 
tober and  its  inclofures,  convinces  me  that  the  conduct,  of  Mr. 
Ellicott  and  Lieutenant  Pope  has  been  neither  "  fcandalcus" 
nor  "  infulting"  towards  the  Spanifh  officers  in  that  country  ; 
and  that  if  any  undue  zeal  or  intemperance  has  been  manifefted 
by  either  in  maintaining  the  juft  Rights  of  the  United  States, — 
the  meafures  adopted  by  thofe  officers  to  evade  the  execution  of 
the  Treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Spain,  have  been 
the  caufe.  It  is  by  this  courfe  of  conduct  in  the  Spanifh  officers 
that  the  King,  their  mafler,  has  been  dishonoured,  and  not  by 
the  actions  of  the  officers  of  the  United  States.  I  may,  doubt- 
lefs,  be  juflified  in  faying,  that  their  detention  of  the  Polls  and 
delays  to  run  the  boundary  line,  have  been  unauthorized  by 
the  King.  It  is  certain  that  neither  of  thofe  Spanifh  officers 
has  ever  intimated  an  order  from  their  government  as  a  war- 
rant or  an  apology  for  their  proceedings. 

In  your  letter  of  the  2ift  of  November,  you  recur  to  the  fe- 
veral  topics  of  your  letter  of  the  6th  of  May,  1797  ;  but  exhibit 
no  new  argument  on  the  points  really  in  difpute.  You  barely 
mention  the  fubject  of  the  articles  contraband  of  war,  and  the 
principle  that  free  Blips  make  free  goods.  The  ftipulations- 


of  the  United  States  on  thefe  points,  in  their  Treaty  of  1794, 
with  Great-Britain,  were  fully  jufHfied  in  my  anfwer  of  the 
1 7th  of  May  to  vour  letter  of  the  6th.  If  any  thing  further 
were  necefTary,  I  would  fay  (what  I  then  mentioned  as  not  to 
be  doubted)  that  the  Spanifh government  voluntarily  entered  in- 
to the  different  flipulations  with  the  United  States,  when  it 
pofTeflfed  full  knowledge  of  our  flipulations  in  the  Commercial 
Treaty  with  Great-Britain  ;  having  in  its  hands  the  Treaty  it- 
felf ;  and  having  alfo  ratified  its  Treaty  with  the  United  States 
fix  months  afterwards  ;  which  the  Spanifh  government  would 
have  been  juflifled  in  refufmg,  had  there  been  any  deception, 
any  want  of  good  faith  on  thefe  points,  on  the  part  of  the  United 
States  ;  but  of  which  not  a  fliadow  of  proof  can  be  adduced. 

The  fame  obfervations  apply  to  the  other  fubjecl  of  your  let- 
ter,— the  navigation  of  the  river  Miflifippi ;  but  with  greater 
force;  for,  as  I  fhowed  in  my  letter  of  the  i^th  of  May,  when 
the  Prince  of  Peace  propofed  a  mutual  ftipulation  to  exclude 
the  Britifh  from  the  navigation  of  the  Miilifippi,  Mr.  Pinck- 
ney  rejected  it,  and  explicitly,  becaufe  it  would  violate  the 
Faith  of  the  United  States  previoufly  pledged  to  Great-Britain  ; 
and  the  projected  Article  of  "the  Prince  of  Peace  was  altered 
accordingly.  Yet  you  now  introduce  thofe  previous  ftipulati- 
ons  as  fubje&s  of  complaint  againft  the  United  States!  It  is 
true,  you  alfo  mention  the  fubfequent  explanatory  article  of 
the  4th  of  May  1796,  which  is  added  to  the  Treaty  of  amity 
commerce  and  navigation  of  1 794,  with  Great-Britain  :  but 
it  is  equally  true  that  this  contains  no  new  ftipulation,  that  it 
recognizes  the  principle  that  no  fubfequent  Treaty  can  make 
void  prior  engagements  (and,  therefore,  that  this  explanatory 
Article  of  1796,  cannot  in  the  fmalleft  degree  affecl:  the  prior 
Treaty  of  1795  with  Spain)  and  that  Brititli  fubjecls,  the  Ci- 
tizens of  the  United  States,  and  the  native  Indians,  mall  en- 
joy full  liberty  of  paflage,  intercourfe  and  commerce  with  each 
other,  "  according  to  the  Stipulations  of  the  third  article  of  the  Trea- 
ty of  amity -,  commerce  and  navigation.'"  So  that  this  explanatory 
article  goes  not  beyond,  but  is  pofitively  confined  within  the 
limits  of  the  third  Article  of  the  Treaty  of  179+;  which; 
preceding,  in  order  of  time,  the  Treaty  with  Spain,  by  more 
than  eleven  months,  and  being  alfo  at  the  conclufion  of  the 
Spanifh  Treaty  perfectly  well  known  to  its  Government ;  it 
cannot,  confequently,  afford  to  Spain  the  flighted  ground  of 
complaint. 

I  pafs  unnoticed  your  lengthy  quotation  from  the  Opinion  of 
Mr.  Randolph,  Attorney  General  of  tlie  United  States  in  1793, 
and  your  obfervations  upon   it;    becaufe  neither  one  nor  the 
Bother  touch  the  effential  point  in  difpute  between  us. 


88. 

As  to  the  queftion  in  the  laft  paragraph  of  your  letter,  I  am 
authorized  to  fay,  That  the  United  States  are  not  concerned 
to  vindicate  the  claim  of  Great-Britain  to  the  navigation  of  the 
river  MifTifippi.  What  was  faid  on  this  fubjedl:  in  my  letter 
of  the  1 7th  of  May,  was  in  confequence  of  your  having  en- 
tered into  an  examination  of  the  Britiih  title  to  this  navigation  ; 
and  I  faid  exprefsly,  that  I  did  not  conceive  it  eflfential  to  the 
fubjecl:  we  were  then  difcufling:  I  merely  followed  you. 
Our  ftipulation  amounts  only  to  this,  that  the  United  States 
fhall  not  obftrudl  the  navigation  of  the  River  by  Britifh  fub- 
jedls.  If  Great-Britain  demands  and  obtains  it ;  or  if  Spain 
admits  her  claim,  as  (he  has  referved  the  right  to  do,  in  the 
4th  Article  of  her  treaty  with  the  United  States,  the  latter  can- 
not oppofe  it ;  and  if  the  Britifh  veffels  and  Boats  do  navigate 
the  MHfifippi,  we  are  bound  to  admit  them  into  our  ports  on 
the  eaftern  bank  of  that  river.  Whether  this  admillion  would 
be  advantageous  or  injurious  to  the  United  States,  it  belonged 
to  them  only  to  judge  :  they  have  not  afked,  nor  will  they  have 
occafion  to  afk  Spain  to  be  the  guardian  of  their  Rights  and 
Interefts  on  the  Miflifippi :  they  only  defire,  in  this  refpecl:, 
that  fhe  would  faithfully  perform  her  own  engagments  fanc- 
tioned  by  a  folemn  Treaty. 

I  am,  Sir, 

Your  obedient  fervant, 

TIMOTHY  PICKERING. 


(No.   19.) 

Extracl  of  a  letter  from    Mr.    Pickering,   Secretary    of  State ,  to 
Mr.   Ellicott,  dated  Department  of  State,  July  i4//;,   1797. 

"  ON  the  8th  of  June  I  received  by  Mr.  Knox  your  difpatches 
dated  the  I4th  of  April,  which  were  laid  before  Congrefs  on 
the  12th  of  June,  and  on  the  2Qth  of  June,  I  received  by  cap- 
tain Hunter,  your  difpatches  dated  the  loth  of  May,  which  on 
the  3d  of  July,  were  alfo  laid  before  Congrefs,  together  with 
the  difpatches  from  Captain  Pope  to  the  Secretary  of  War. 
Thefe  communications  to  Congrefs  appear  in  the  inclofed  pam- 
phlets. 

With  refpecl  to  the  important  bufinefs  with  which  you  are 
charged,  the  repeated  prom ifes,  followed  by  as  often  repeated 
failures  to  enter  upon  it,  by  the  Spanifh  governors,  with  other 


circumflances,  afford  too  much  reafon  to  believe  that  there  is 
an  intention  to  poftpone  it.  Neverthelefs,  the  Prefident  is  of 
opinion,  and  directs  that  you  fhould  remain  at  the  Natchez., 
and  always  hold  yourfelf  in  readinefs  to  commence  the  running 
of  the  boundary  line  between  the  territories  of  the  United  States 
and  of  his  Catholic  Majelty.  You  will  endeavour,  in  concert 
with  Governor  Gayofo,  or  other  proper  officer  of  his  Catholic 
Majefty,  to  fix  a  time  when  this  work  of  afcertaining  the  boun- 
dary line  (hall  commence.  This  endeavour  may  be  renewed 
as  often  as  you  mall  think  fit.  Great  care  mould  be  ufed  to 
give  no  juft  caufe  of  offence  to  the  Spanifh  Government.  What 
will  be  the  final  refult  of  its  meafures  is  uncertain  ;  but  if  war 
mould  follow,  it  will  be  of  the  laft  importance  that  the  United 
States  fhould  net  be  the  aggreiTors.  The  Prefident,  therefore, 
defires  that  your  conduct  ihould  be  perfectly  guarded,  moderate, 
and  prudent." 


(No.  20.) 

Ext  raft  of  a  letter  f run  Mr.  Pickering,  Secretary  of  State,  to  Mr. 
Ellicott,  dated  Department  of  State,  Philadelphia,  AugvftTp, 
1797. 

"  YOUR  exprcfles,  Mr.  Bean  and  Mr.  Robins,  arrived  here 
on  the  24th  inftant,  and  delivered  me  your  two  letters  of  June 
27th.  The  fame  day  I  received  your  letters  of  May  27th  and 
June  4th  and  5th. 

The  Baron  de  Carondelet's  proclamation  of  the  24th  of  May, 

nclofed  in  your  letter  of  June  4th,  abandons  almoft  all  the  for- 

ner  pretences  for  retaining  the  pofts,  which  he  fays  "  isocca- 

ioned  only  by  the  imperious  neceflity  of  fecuring  Lower  Loui- 

fiana  from  the  hoftilities  of  the  Englim,  who  have  fet  on  foot 

without  regard  to  the  inviolability  of  the  territory  of  the  Uni- 

ed  States)'  an  expedition  againft  Upper  Louifiana."     By  my 

bnner  difpatches  covering  the  printed  reports  and  documents, 

rou  will  have  feen  that  this  expedition  had  never  any  exiftence. 

This  is  more  fully  (hown  in  my  letter  of  the  8th  inftant,  to  the 

Chevalier  de  Yrujo,  now   inclofed.     And  my  anfwer  to  him 

about  the  navigation  of  the  Miilifippi,  and  the  articles  of  our 

reaties  with  with  Great-Britain  concerning  it,  alfo  among  the 

printed  documents,  demonftrates  that  in  thofe  flipulations  we 

lave  not  departed  from  the  ftriaeft  line  of  good  faith  towards 

M 


9o. 

Spain  ;  that  we  have  granted  nothing  in  refpeft  to  the  naviga- 
tion of  the  Miflifippi,  to  Great-Britain  ;  and  that  the  ideas  the 
United  States  entertained  on  that  fubjeft,  were  perfectly  known 
and  underflood  by  the  government  of  Spain,  when  our  treaty 
with  Spain  was  concluded  ;  and  that  there  is  nothing  contra- 
dictory between  the  two  treaties,  the  Britifh  and  Spanifh. 

As  therefore  the  Baron  de  Carondelet  has  not  a  fhadow  of 
foundation  to  fufpe6Lsn  expedition  by  the  Britifh  againft  Up- 
per Louifiana,  as  the  American  government  has  formally  de- 
clared to  the  Britifh  Minifter,  for  the  information  of  his  govern- 
ment, that  we  will  fufferthe  march  of  neither  Britifh  nor  Spa- 
nifh troops  through  our  territory,  for  the  purpofe  of  hoftility 
of  one  againft  the  other;  as,  finally,  the  Britifh  themfelves  (as 
you  will  fee  in  Mr.  Lifton's  letter  among  the  printed  documents) 
declare  they  never  had  formed  fuch  a  plan  of  an  expedition,  and 
acknowledged  that  its  execution  would  violate  our  territorial 
rights — for  thefe  reafons,  on  the  principles  of  his  proclamation 
the  Baron  ought  immediately  to  evacuate  the  pofts  and  territory 
cf  the  United  States. 

Thefe  obfervations  wrill  alfo  apply  to  the  Baron's  proclama- 
tion of  the  31  ft  of  May,  in  which,  however,  he  takes  fome- 
what  new  ground.  What  "  fecurity"  can  the  United  States 
give,  or  rather  what  will  the  Baron  deem  a  "  fecurity"  againft 
a  defcent  of  the  Englifh  by  the  MiiTifippi  ? 

If  the  fa  els  and  aflurances  already  ftated  and  given  on  the 
part  of  the  United  States  do  not  fatisfy,  nothing  can. 

With  refpecl  to  any  hoftile  intentions  of  the  United  States 
towards  Spain,  as  intimated  by  the  Baron  in  this  laft  proclama- 
tion, nothing  is  more  unfounded.  The  march  of  the  troops  to 
TenefTee  from  the  Ohio,  is  for  the  fole  purpofe  of  eftabliihing 
a  force  in  thai  country  to  reftrain  the  inhabitants  or  other  citi- 
zens from  aggreffions  againft  the  Cherokees,  and  efpecially  to 
prevent  a  forced  fettlement,  which  was  threatened,  on  the  In- 
dian lands,  and  any  orders  to  the  Cumberland  militia  to  hold 
themfelves  in  readinefs,  can  be  only  for  the  object  of  prevent- 
ing encroachments  on  the  Indian  lands,  and  to  preferve  peace. 
If  we  meditated  an  attack  againft  the  Spaniards  on  the  Miffi- 
fippi  we  ihould  certainly  contemplate  an  eafier  route  than  by 
a  wildernefs  of  many  hundred  miles  in  extent,  through  which 
the  tranfportation  of  ftores  and  provifions  would  be  impractica- 
ble ;  or  of  fuch  extreme  difficulty  and  boundlefs  expence,  as 
folly  alone  would  attempt. 

I  have  now  only  to  notice  the  general  commotion  at  the 
Natchez,  among  the  inhabitants,  againft  the  Spanifh  govern-    , 
ment,  which  feems  to  have  been  quieted  very  much  by  your  J 
prudent  management.    This  line  of  conduct,  caution,  prudence, 


91- 

moderation — fo  as  by  all  means  to  avoid  the  poflibility  of  a 
charge  of  aggrefiion  againft  the  United  States — you  will  fee  in 
my  letter  of  the  I4th  of  July,  was  fpecially  enjoined  by  the 
Prefident.  And  a  perfeverance  in  the  fame  courfe  I  truft  will 
eventually  iflue  in  a  peaceable  adjuftment  of  the  difputes  now 
fubfifting,  refpecling  the  ports,  the  country  where  they  are  fitu- 
ated,  and  the  navigation  of  the  Miflifippi.  The  pacific  views  of 
the  United  States  and  their  good  faith  are  not  to  be  doubted,  and 
it  is  clear  as  demonstration  can  make  it,  that  ,the  Baron  has 
nothing  to  apprehend  from  the  Britifh  from  Canada :  and  con- 
fequently  that  he  has  now  no  caufe  or  pretence  for  retaining 
the  pofts,  or  for  delaying  to  run  the  boundary  line." 


Y 


